What's new

India mum on Nobel winner Liu Xiaobo

Just as I tried hard not to post any Chinese material, you should consider the author's impartiality. There is no end to falsehood from both sides but the Indian side is necessarily more prolific in defending their position, (especially a biographer of Nehru's who was the buck-passer in chief) seeing as it was a defining moment and something that still rancors today.

No one is impartial, every job starts with a preoccupation. BTW i have not commented on the book but the discussion and its my personal opinion.

Your link book has given extensive details on war and operational tactics. It has nothing to opine in highlights, about the topic in hand. Its a torture to dig out from you link; what exactly you want to say.

As far as my link is concerned then i do believe in many critical glimpses the author has given which are missing in most of the typical
China -India debates. ''Punishing others'' is key the word for me to squeeze every thing out to understand 1962 debacle.

I am blogging from last 3 - 4 years and i am bitten by many Chinese theories against India about its border disputes, forward policy, nuclear program etc. The time is great healer, now China has recently engaged into disputes with its other neighbors. Border issues with Bhutan are also not fully resolved. Punishing Pakistan on not committing to curb extremism effecting China or settling peace with India is at the bay in foreseeable future. Though all disputes are isolated on its own merits but there is one generalization; China as a primary contestant. Like we say your reputation travels before you. Being an ordinary Indian i can afford enough tranquility to move on and be friend with Chinese people and i am sure Chinese too are gracious enough to understand the need than going into nauseating details.

But the question here is who is more alarmed, proactive and assertive? Who has more say upon its community to shout for the calm?

@ Below freezing

I have already said that Chinese actions are purely for their strategic aspirations and here no body is good, bad or wicked. The discussion is to clear some air; who is more careful about each other's sensitivities?

I am happy to be proved wrong but my sources are very Indian and i believe in that information. Same can be said about you, therefore we can call the compromise here to share information.

The highlights of my assertions can be concluded as DL is not the reason for China's remorse with India but a mask some thing like this :disagree::angry:. China is too big to care about fled Tibetans and it has been proved by the history till date. However Tibetans are your own people they want to come back and enjoy the prosperity China is offering but with their ethos intact. If CCP is saying that they are outlaws, mischief monger, criminals then one must not cry foul victims on international forums with such extreme stands.

China Should resolve all border disputes with India sooner or later by showing more leniency to India's claims. There is practical unsaid assurance as even militarily, India can not entrench into Chinese territories to expand. Also given the nature of Indian investment in defense a wisdom of not perusing blind arm race with China is very visible to snub Chinese policy makers (if there is any) who may be expecting India to go bankrupt. India is long race horse. There is a famous bollywood dialogue that ''when your enemies life is increased you should make him a friend''.

Tibetans in India do not weigh more than its cordial relationship with China but humanitarian indeed at any cost.

Regards
 
No one is impartial, every job starts with a preoccupation. BTW i have not commented on the book but the discussion and its my personal opinion.

Your link book has given extensive details on war and operational tactics. It has nothing to opine in highlights, about the topic in hand. Its a torture to dig out from you link; what exactly you want to say.

As far as my link is concerned then i do believe in many critical glimpses the author has given which are missing in most of the typical
China -India debates. ''Punishing others'' is key the word for me to squeeze every thing out to understand 1962 debacle.

I am blogging from last 3 - 4 years and i am bitten by many Chinese theories against India about its border disputes, forward policy, nuclear program etc. The time is great healer, now China has recently engaged into disputes with its other neighbors. Border issues with Bhutan are also not fully resolved. Punishing Pakistan on not committing to curb extremism effecting China or settling peace with India is at the bay in foreseeable future. Though all disputes are isolated on its own merits but there is one generalization; China as a primary contestant. Like we say your reputation travels before you. Being an ordinary Indian i can afford enough tranquility to move on and be friend with Chinese people and i am sure Chinese too are gracious enough to understand the need than going into nauseating details.

But the question here is who is more alarmed, proactive and assertive? Who has more say upon its community to shout for the calm?

Regards


No one is impartial but to not be constantly on watch for impartiality and maintain an open mind, is inexcusable. However uncomfortable such self-examinations are, they still beat being set in a distorted reality by a mile. China was not the aggressor in 1962, I'll say it flat and plain. It was Nehru who tried to push a territorial claim left to him by the British, claims set unilaterally and through coercion. All of China-India relations is tainted by this coloured lens, China is the aggressor, China is not to be trusted.

China actually has offered to settle its territorial claims many times, before and after 1962, but no Indian politician is strong enough to take China's offer precisely because 98% of Indians think as you do. It would be political suicide.

If India and China have to normalize their relations, they must solve their border disputes. This is only possible if Indians leaders are backed by a democratic consensus. In order for this consensus to evolve, Indians must know the truth of the war. No better beginning can be made than the official publication of the Indian army's own account in the Henderson-Brooks report.

Anyways think as you like but this is why I am not optimistic about India in general and India-China specifically. A country has to see the world in the cold hard light of day, or they are set to failure.
 
If he is a terrorist as you have said then why you are not asking him to be handed over. Your hesitation can be used against you. Clear yourself and come up with a sound argument.
You are now nitpicking lines cause your accusation vis a vis Chinese sensitivity and DL in India has gone into dust. The holistic sense of my assertion is simply to snub the only one claim all Chinese typically make that India is harboring Tibetans against China. You have yourself supported my argument that he is not a factor to be in PLA simulations of war practices and any keen PLA watcher can tell you for sure. Like we say ''tel dekho tel ke dhar dekho'' See whats in oil and how it flows. Follow the money(foreign policy) if you want to follow the threat (military), no where in recent past China has invested military resources to curb would be uprising in Tibet rather they are busy investing in Japan et al.

very well lets leave behind wether or not the dalai lama is a terrorist.

i never said india was harboring Tibetan terrorists against china(at least i didnt mean for it to sound that way), the original assertions was india took pains to following china sensitivities via tibet and as i pointed out the dalai lama and the tibetian government in exile is clearly a case where india didnt. and to futher make my point i said the government in exile is completely against sensitivities of china as disallowing this organization does not = watching refugees die, you can still take them in, not to mention this organization is illegal by your own official views.



If he is not a threat to China then why China should accuse India and punish on different issues sensitive to her (India). Bogeyman isn't it?

i disagree, send him to china and we will never hear anything from him again, the countries he visits will never hand him to china, rising that point will only hinder other relations.

Why would you risk your diplomatic relations with any nation including USA if president is meeting with him?

1. No harm since there is no risk of back firing cause any sane nation would simply ignore the protest due to its low face value.

2. Lack of other powers (soft etc.) to project and to create diplomatic pressures/leverages thus DL good enough to inject guilt in other nations and threats of so called repercussions (trade, diplomatic etc).

3. Elephant's tusks for domestic exhibition.

Why would you challenge such high value package (an excuse) who is serving your 'a kind of power projection?

simple, west is more powerful than china(specifically the USA) hence the lack of power to stop others from meeting him(thus only options is protest given limited retaliation by other means) i would say wait til china's GDP= us GDP and see how many leader will meet him but by the point he will have probably died.

To answer your question i would say, when a MEA spokesperson draft a protest they do write it very carefully. Till today i haven't seen a single statement where DL was condemned but the nation. China can not order others to segregate him.

on one hand you say china uses him as a bogyman and other the other you say they never condemn him? you got some funny logic there. is your own news sources good enough? China condemns Dalai Lama for 'litany of crimes' - Express India

You can not establish relation between Tibet and China with this one sided generic imperial nonsense. Tibetan language, culture, religion was exported from some where else not China. How Chinese emperor was greater then rest of the humanity or his title, has nothing to do with if inferior legitimacy or status of DL. Tibet was a separate entity having relationships with Mongols and Indian kings as well, but only after 17th century Chinese started to Claim that Tibet was a under Qing administration which many Tibetans still disagree.

The Yuan Dynasty had control over Tibet that is not disputed, the Ming claim is disputed, the Qing Claim is NOT disputed they had Defacto independence in the late 19th to early 20th century, but lets not get into history now.

I do not want to go into this cause both parties have made different claims. Why he would revolt when Tibet was always a sovereign feudal monarchy and DLs were its supreme leaders. Treaty signed by DL to his disciple qing emperor was to protect Tibet against military invasions, not an instrument of Accession.

very well we shall not go further into this

America offered help to India and India at the start accepted it. But timid India for not becoming west's proxy again, refused that help till today. 1962 war is testimony to that; when stakes were high and offer was more inviting.

the CIA thing happend before 62 while india still sing friendship while pushing the boarder

They are not issuing passports or stapled visa's from Dharmshala.
''The govt in exile'' is a technicality not legality against China's claim of Tibet. India is not a signatory of United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. So to survive as a human and travel to other nations they need some de facto provision. Therefore there is nothing to give China sleepless nights about this. However what China is doing to Kashmiri people who own Indian Passport is a sheer hypocrisy and back stabbing. I reckon even Chinese immigration officers work with prejudice against India due to lack of proper information controlled by CCP. They (Tibetans) all are living like ordinary Indians facing poverty, unemployment, everyday struggle etc. Many wants to go back to China/Tibet cause they can not be as comfortable in India as they will be in China. But they love their religion and China has no place for their freedom.

you say technically but i see it differently, again hosting a separatist government is illegal to ur own official views and is not necessary for the survival of the refugees. china stapling paper visas is far less provoking than if China hosted a Kashmir government in exile in beijing. speaking of hypocrisy it works both ways, we can simply say why would you complain about visas when you host an entire illegal government dedicated to threatening our security.

They can do whatever they want withing the limits of their democratic rights, they are not assets like Taliban was once for Pakistan but liability for India. Tibet is yours and that the only thing you should focus on.

so then no complaints if a china hosts a Maoist club of india in china? as india should only focus in india?

''Forward policy'' another Chinese propaganda and myth. If Nehru was to be a preemptive strategist then things would have been totally different. Before India army started petrolling, Chinese were encroaching over LAC and our parliament was cursing Nehru day and night (on the record of Parliament proceedings), to do something he was reluctant to, cause Chinese officials were doing double talk and PM was optimistic.

Myth.... is that what it has become in india? i provided CIA links before, go read them, and im not making the CCP out as angels either but the refusal of the indian government to negotiate at the time was what push the situation over the edge(that included stationing troops in UNDISPUTED chinese lands hence technically india has already invaded china BEFORE china attacked(there goes ur backstabbing theory).

China is already supporting many rebels through its proxy 'one and the same thing'' and India is pretty capable of dealing with them.

proof would be nice as i had provided

China can not afford bad PR from west like Pakistan can, cause west has its interest in Pakistan. However China can try its luck so that west can expedite its propaganda against China on supporting terrorism directly into India. West is the key. India refused it on previous occasion, see the difference. India snubbed CIA's offer (so they can now publish the report to blame it on forward policy?!) and you never had the offer.

oh please china already has plenty of bad PR.(list will fill libraries) suddenly when its against you , you decide the west is now blaming you and not speaking the truth, how convenient, not to mention china and the west (and USSR at this point) were still mortal enemies.

Fair enough,
But China's foreign policy is brute and over assertive, its like twisting of nickers without any good reason. They should come up clear that its all about strategic aspiration, it is all about this to me not sure about you!

china'd foreign policy is really still in the making

He is CCP's bogeyman for Chinese nationalist and an asset to bully around without the fear of fire back. its like ''Hathi jinda lakh ka mara sawa lakh ka'' An alive elephant values hundred thousand (100000) and dead hundred twenty five thousand (125000).

what can i say i disagree
 
If you are referring to the Henderson Brooks–Bhagat Report, a journalist Neville Maxwell had been given access right after the war and if you read his book, it cites directly from the report. His version of events corroborate China's version of events. It was Nehru's fault.

Also have you considered the reason behind the GoI's refusal to release the report despite the overwhelming benefit it would have provided in reforming the IA after the war? The sign of a guilty party.

All this has been explained by Joe Shearer very well and i have come to agree with him on it (He is a Chinese lover neverthless), my outburst was for freezing not for you. The only reason i brought u around was to ask Mr.freezing to learn something from you, i.e. veiled rebuttals.

He gets fired up very easily, what is the use of such thing on internet?? Troll troll and more troll thats it.
 
MEA blocks Dalai Lama PhD - Hindustan Times
MEA blocks Dalai Lama PhD
The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has scuttled a proposal by the Delhi-based Jamia Millia Islamia, a central university, to award an honorary doctorate to the Dalai Lama. The human resource development ministry has been informed that such a step would not be appropriate at this stage.
In a clear indication that it is keen to avoid angering China, which regards the exiled Tibetan leader as a traitor, the MEA has taken this position despite all other agencies involved having approved the idea.
Though the Dalai Lama has received similar honorary doctorates from at least half a dozen top international institutions, Jamia would have been the first Indian higher educational institution to confer one on him. (He is also recipient of the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize).
HRD ministry officials refused to comment but other government sources confirmed the ministry had forwarded the Jamia proposal to the MEA for clearance. University authorities had written to the HRD ministry last month saying they would like to present the degree at their convocation in November.
Tensions between China and the Dalai Lama have often threatened to affect Sino-Indian relations. China objected to the Dalai Lama’s visit last year to Arunachal Pradesh — which it claims as its territory. Earlier this year, it also objected to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh meeting the Dalai Lama.
Top government sources have told HT India does not wish to worsen its relationship with China, already under stress over China’s Kashmir policy and other irritants. “Our respect for his Holiness the Dalai Lama is immense,” a source said.
The Dalai Lama, who has lived in India since 1959 when he escaped from communist China, runs the Tibetan government-in-exile from Dharamshala in Himachal Pradesh. India officially describes him as an honoured guest and spiritual leader who is not allowed to use Indian soil for political activity.
 
Back
Top Bottom