Arunachal in China? That is not the reality, says PM Manmohan Singh

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

we just need have more control of the flow of the river through Tibet. That is already a lot leverage over India already.

China is control its river flow into India,

I find the significance of rivers originating from Tibet having some kind of leverage over India a bit overhyped.

Considering the fact, blocking the flow of river into India will directly impact volume of flow into other nations like Nepal,Pakistan,Bangladesh which even more dependent on rivers than India.

Will China be willing to cause trouble to these nations just to have a leverage over India?

Excuse the source of the map,but this the best one i could find regarding the rivers originating.

from Tibet.

So war is the last resort and nobody wants it if there is any way out.

True!

 

[KS]

There you go again, getting all huffy and hurt. If you want to dispute what I put forth, I'm happy to listen, but all you've wrote is a chest-out defense of democracy in general, talking about nothing in particular.

I can sum up what you wrote here in that many words, as "oh yeah, we'll have a plan soon enough, just you wait."

Did you have a chance to read my post on the previous page? What's your opinion?

There is nothing to comment or dispute in Joe's post except that it is based on a series of assumption on his part that what would/could be India and China's course of action in the future.

So as much chance is there for that to happen, an equal chance is there that it may not happen.

Let time tell the truth - But one thing is for sure, a repeat of '62 is not going to happen.

 

[Dharmocol]

If there will be another border conflict (war) again, it will definitely conventional. India will have no gut to use nuclear weapon in this case. BTW, even India wants to use it, will it be in China advantage anyway?

Definitely India will not be using nukes in a limited conventional battle,but in a limited conventional battle,it is ur assumption that China will unilaterally make strides.

About India using nukes benefiting China,once again a wrong assumption,China will not benefit anything even it successfully launches a counter punch on India obliterating us,it will only make matter's worse for China,What China is today is the workship of centuries,all India do is destructing it within seconds,making u the prey of western world who will not be even able to use a shield against even a bullet,not many of ur country man agree with it or accept it due to their evaluation's of Indian stockpile based on the so stone age NGO reports.

The majority of western China are not economical important, while it is just on the contrary on the India side. We already have conventional weapons that can shoot over several hundreds of miles, which are even missiles.

Now this is the difference between a full scale warfare and a limited conflict,why do u think that in a limited warfare China will target Indian cities,that only make matter worst transforming it into a full scale warfare,and in such a circumstance,the far away eastern coast of China will not remain that far for us,by the way Indian strategy in a limited scale warfare is only cutting down tibet from china making transportation(goods,personals and weapon's) worse,we will not be looking towards cities.

By the way u said u have many weapon's that can reach our heartlands which include missiles,know all want to know is what r those unstoppable weapon's excluding ur missiles,dnt say ur artillery for god sake,because as far as I know a Smerch placed in Amritsar can not even target Delhi,leave the Tibetan plateau behind those mighty 8000 meter high Himalayas.

In addition, we do not need even to have a border conflict, we just need have more control of the flow of the river through Tibet. That is already a lot leverage over India already.

Furthermore, do not say nobody is doing river flow control. US is doing it over Mexico. India is doing it over Pakistan and Bangladesh. So if China is control its river flow into India, I do not see why it is impossible.

Now u r on point,yes it is a concern for us,frankly speaking i dont know the possible repercussion's due to this,but afaik NE is also not economically important for us,I dont know even if this had any impact on the entire India,even though NE will be definitely affected.

 

[ephone]

I only say river control is a possibility and never say China will do it.

If indeed it is done, I bet China government will compensate those countries, e.g. Nepal, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

 

[AerospaceEngineer]

Arunachal paradesh is our integral part of India and will remain so..Anyone who have guts please come and take it away from us

One simple line.....

If you want some, come and get some....

And Aksai Chin is China's land.

One simple line

If you want some come and get some

Oh, BTW, in the future China is gonna build rail way through Aksai Chin connect China and Pakistan to support Pakistan.

 

[ephone]

You should read my post a little careful. I say it is in China advantage, not in China's benefit. Nuke is already used, who the heck has benefit???

I mean China has a superior advantage in this type of weaponry and geographically, it is also in China advantage if it is used.

The main point of my post (the longer one) is that both sides claim over South Tibet (AP) and both sides tries to show why they have. I show mine and need see your evidence. Please do not use British one. Do you remember when India got its independence, you abolished all the unequal treaties and said those British ones were not legal???

Furthermore, China will not the one who raise the scale of war. So if you have not targeted our cities yet, we will not do so. We will make it at most a border conflict at first.

In addition, my main point of my post (longer one) is not how to start a war or we should start a war. That is totally off my point.

When each side has a claim over one territory and say it has historical claim. How about both sides show it?

Just like Diaoyu Island, Japan says it has historical claim which it claims it was found by a Japanese around 1894, coincidently, around the same time their navy attacked our navy and took over Taiwan as well.

Our historical records show that we are hundreds of years earlier than that by Ming and Qing dynasty's records.

One of such records is on auction last year and the Japanese even wanted to buy it from the seller. I bet it wants to buy it and destroy it.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

Did you have a chance to read my post on the previous page? What's your opinion?

I'm with Joe's Pov

 

[ephone]

And Aksai Chin is China's land.

One simple line

If you want some come and get some

Oh, BTW, in the future China is gonna build rail way through Aksai Chin connect China and Pakistan to support Pakistan.

That is not the right attitude. If both sides talk like that, there won't be any dialogue.

 

[gubbi]

There you go again, getting all huffy and hurt.

There you go judging again.

If you want to dispute what I put forth, I'm happy to listen, but all you've wrote is a chest-out defense of democracy in general, talking about nothing in particular.
I can sum up what you wrote here in that many words, as "oh yeah, we'll have a plan soon enough, just you wait."

That chest-out defense of democracy is the precise reason as to why the political divide in a democracy cannot be abused, as implied by Joe. I could have written that smart-aleck retort as easily as you typed it, but you need to understand why the machinations of the Chinese govt wouldnt work with the Indian govt.

You also need to understand that India's rise is relatively new as opposed to that of China's. Thus it is more important to understand the complexity of formulating a long term foreign policy with the changing geo-politics and India's changing role in it. Foreign policies of socialist leaning governments of years goneby wont work in today's scenario. The Chinese game of pricking Indians with such inane issues results in somewhat knee-jerk reactions but would ultimately be helpful to India in the long run.

China has been through a similar process with the US, you would know that.

 

[CardSharp]

Nukes aren't even an option on either side. Both have no first use and this is not a matter of survival.

 

[CardSharp]

I live in a democracy and as a citizen I've voted in every election since I was 18. I am just as interested by Canadian politics as I am about international politics (this just isn't the place for it). So you can drop the, oh he just doesn't know anything about democracy shtick.

There you go judging again.

That chest-out defense of democracy is the precise reason as to why the political divide in a democracy cannot be abused, as implied by Joe. I could have written that smart-aleck retort as easily as you typed it, but you need to understand why the machinations of the Chinese govt wouldnt work with the Indian govt.

Point to where I suggested India abandon democracy or take up "Chinese machinations"

You also need to understand that India's rise is relatively new as opposed to that of China's. Thus it is more important to understand the complexity of formulating a long term foreign policy with the changing geo-politics and India's changing role in it. Foreign policies of socialist leaning governments of years goneby wont work in today's scenario. The Chinese game of pricking Indians with such inane issues results in somewhat knee-jerk reactions but would ultimately be helpful to India in the long run.

China has been through a similar process with the US, you would know that.

Does a country have to "rise" in order to have an effective foreign policy? and it's not like this is a new problem for India, your leaders have been wrestling with it since pre 1950 independence.

 

[Dharmocol]

When each side has a claim over one territory and say it has historical claim. How about both sides show it?

Just like Diaoyu Island, Japan says it has historical claim which it claims it was found by a Japanese around 1894, coincidently, around the same time their navy attacked our navy and took over Taiwan as well.

Our historical records show that we are hundreds of years earlier than that by Ming and Qing dynasty's records.

One of such records is on auction last year and the Japanese even wanted to buy it from the seller. I bet it wants to buy it and destroy it.

This had been discussed numerous times here about the ownership of Arunachal/South Tibet.

On what basis u claim Arunachal,because Ming or Quing dynasty ruled it some light years ago,on this basis we can claim the entire South Asia or the mongols can claim entire Asia,thats ridiculous.

A post of Joe quoted by Cardshape explain's the demographies of Tibet,the culture associated with people,it even do not have stark resemblance with people from Tibet.

If the evidence is all about some pre historic conquest and controlls,it will then always remain disputed.

 

[gubbi]

Point to where I suggested India abandon democracy or take up "Chinese machinations"

You posted that comment which Joe made. So assuming you do support his pov, I dont and I countered as to why. The point you try to make above is irrelevant to the issue.

Does a country have to "rise" in order to have an effective foreign policy? and it's not like this is a new problem for India, your leaders have been wrestling with it since pre 1950 independence.

You again fail to understand India foreign policy and how it is tied to India's new found economic powerhouse status.

Does NAM ring a bell? Does cozying up to the USSR during the cold war register anything? Though India wasnt exactly antagonistic of US, there was a lot of mistrust between the two governments during the cold war era. Unlike a lot of former Soviet block countries which were quick to embrace NATO, India bided time to come up with a very balanced foreign policy vis-a-vis Russia and other western countries, although initially we did have problems.

Consider the changing Indo-Israeli relations. India didnt have formal diplomatic relations with Israel until lately IIRC till late 90s. That changed, didnt it? Indian economy was based on 'License Raj', but with the opening up of the economy in early 90s, India had to reformulate its relations with other countries.

Similarly with China. Right now, India is still learning how to handle an increasingly belligerent China. Though, for all the arrogance Chinese showed with stapled visas for Kashmiris, the issue was successfully dealt with by India. Now again the case with the same stapled visas for people from Arunachal Pradesh. Why after so many years would the Chinese do that? Why the sudden itch to provoke neighbors by creating a new issue? Clearly China is testing waters or may be 'pressuring' India. But that doesnt mean that India would lose sight of its interests. Dont assume initial knee-jerk reactions to be the basis for a long term foreign policy. In your words: "oh yeah, we'll have a plan soon enough, just you wait"

 

[CardSharp]

You posted that comment which Joe made. So assuming you do support his pov, I dont and I countered as to why.

This leads to me believe you either didn't read what Joe wrote or you didn't understand. Here's a challenge find a passage in what Joe wrote that suggests India abandon democracy in favour of a Chinese system. Post it and I'll gladly eat crow.

Does NAM ring a bell? Does cozying up to the USSR during the cold war register anything? Though India wasnt exactly antagonistic of US, there was a lot of mistrust between the two governments during the cold war era. Unlike a lot of former Soviet block countries which were quick to embrace NATO, India bided time to come up with a very balanced foreign policy vis-a-vis Russia and other western countries, although initially we did have problems.

Consider the changing Indo-Israeli relations. India didnt have formal diplomatic relations with Israel until lately IIRC till late 90s. That changed, didnt it? Indian economy was based on 'License Raj', but with the opening up of the economy in early 90s, India had to reformulate its relations with other countries.

Similarly with China. Right now, India is still learning how to handle an increasingly belligerent China. Though, for all the arrogance Chinese showed with stapled visas for Kashmiris, the issue was successfully dealt with by India. Now again the case with the same stapled visas for people from Arunachal Pradesh. Why after so many years would the Chinese do that? Why the sudden itch to provoke neighbors by creating a new issue? Clearly China is testing waters or may be 'pressuring' India. But that doesnt mean that India would lose sight of its interests. Dont assume initial knee-jerk reactions to be the basis for a long term foreign policy. In your words: "oh yeah, we'll have a plan soon enough, just you wait"

I don't even know what you are trying to argue anymore. What is your thesis in one sentence?

 

[ephone]

This had been discussed numerous times here about the ownership of Arunachal/South Tibet.

On what basis u claim Arunachal,because Ming or Quing dynasty ruled it some light years ago,on this basis we can claim the entire South Asia or the mongols can claim entire Asia,thats ridiculous.

A post of Joe quoted by Cardshape explain's the demographies of Tibet,the culture associated with people,it even do not have stark resemblance with people from Tibet.

If the evidence is all about some pre historic conquest and controlls,it will then always remain disputed.

Qing is not light years ago. Qing was overturned in 1911. After Qing, Beiyang Republic took over the central government, then KMT Republic of China, and then Communist PRC. So throughout the history, China central government has never given up Tibet and even during its weakest time, our officials and their office was still in Tibet, just not the Army.

For example, when the notorious McMahon Line, which India bases it claim on, was drawn, the central government of China refused to recognized it at all even though we have no strength then to driven away the British. Our claim of Tibet is undisputed in the world, including India as well. The supposed "Human Right" is not in this discussion.

So China claim over Tibet is continuous up to today. If South Tibet (AP) was always under control of Tibet, and if China claims Tibet, how could it will not claim South Tibet?

For evidence? I bet every Dalai Lama has its officials there to collect tax and Budala palace should have all the past collection records. After all, Dalai Lama is the supreme leader then to control religion and wealth on every corner of Tibet. I doubt Dalai Lama would NOT even control its birth place. When don't we send historians of both sides there digging those historical journals???

On the contrary, India's presence, besides British, only started after India's independence and Nehru thought it would be good to "go east", which meant grabbing (stealing) more land from neighboring Tibet, which is claimed by China while China was too busy to fight a civil war.

If you want to talk culture association, then a lot of areas in India has no such clear association with your Hindu culture as well. Even in China, Tibet is different from main Han Chinese, the Hmong minority in the South, Mongolian minority in the North and etc all have distinct culture from the main Han Chinese. Even in Russia, those Tajiks, Uzbeks and etc are all different in culture from Russia.

If simply by culture association, the whole world will divided into thousands of pieces.

Historical control is still the most sought evidence in all territorial dispute. Culture association will come secondary if it is really needed.