What's new

India must kick China out of Sri Lanka: William Avery

StormShadow

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
3,485
Reaction score
-10
New York: There are few more knowledgeable observers of US-India relations than William H Avery, a former US diplomat, who served at the US Consulate in Chennai in the 1990s, a time when India’s relations with the US soured after New Delhi’s nuclear tests. In his new book, China’s Nightmare, America’s Dream: India as the Next Global Power, Avery offers a detailed anatomy of the growing ties between the world’s largest and wealthiest democracies.

Avery’s book also delivers a broadside against China and says India must respond to how China has advanced its influence in the region, with allies like Pakistan, Myanmar and Sri Lanka. China has established itself as a growing, and sometimes bullying, power in India’s neighbourhood.

India's economic growth since 1991 hasn't translated into global political clout, reasons William Avery. Reuters

India and most of the countries in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have festering territorial disputes with China. Avery says India must respond to the Chinese challenge by spending even more on defence and using economic persuasion to influence its neighbours.

“India must now concentrate on the Finlandization of Sri Lanka,” Avery writes, while referring to Finland’s subjugation by the Soviet Union during the Cold War. “In the short term this will mean preventing any further non-Indian involvement in Sri Lanka’s affairs.”

Avery described how China invested millions to turn the sleepy fishing hamlet of Hambantota in Sri Lanka into a booming new port, just off India’s southeast coast, furthering an ambitious trading strategy in South Asia that is reshaping the region and forcing India to rethink relations with its neighbours.

China has been developing port facilities in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Myanmar, and it is planning to build railroad lines in Nepal. These projects, analysts like Avery argue, are irksome to India; there are worries that China is expanding its sphere of regional influence by surrounding India with a “string of pearls” that could eventually undermine India’s pre-eminence and potentially rise to an economic and security threat.

Avery worries that India’s economic growth since 1991 has not been matched by an appropriate increase in its global political clout. It is now, however, beyond the shadow of a doubt that the Obama administration, like the previous Bush administration, is investing in a long-term strategic partnership with India, and has identified China as a threat while declaring Asia as a priority to the US.

India is no budding UK, and any US policymaker who believes New Delhi will act as a lieutenant for US interests has been smoking something herbal. :lol: But Avery suggests that New Delhi must build on recent economic successes to make India a truly global power. He suggests that where India sees common interests with the US — a wide and growing field — it should be more than willing to cooperate.

“India possesses the same core values that underpinned the Anglo-American relationship: democracy, human rights, the rule of law and the free market,” Avery writes in his book.

Despite rooting for a stronger India-US partnership, Avery compares India’s reliance on IT outsourcing, or supplying low-cost brains over the Internet to largely US companies, as a kind of “colonial servitude.” He implies that Indian firms are boosting efficiency for US companies with factory-like business processes. “Today,” he writes, “India is falling in to the colonial trap all over again, except this time it is doing so willingly.” :hitwall:
The Wall Street Journal felt that Avery’s book, while “thought-provoking,” sort of missed the plot when it panned outsourcing which was a huge business opportunity.

“It’s a fair point that IT outsourcing is draining India’s brightest minds from pursuing innovation. But to compare the industry to India’s plight under the British Empire, when the country exported raw materials and imported goods manufactured from those materials, is a step too far. (India, for instance, runs a large trade surplus with the US),” wrote Tom Wright in The Wall Street Journal.

Avery will warm the hearts of the folks opposing Wal-Mart’s march into India by arguing that India should think about “more protection” for its nascent industries at a time when its markets are growing and the West is stagnant.

India must kick China out of Sri Lanka: William Avery | Firstpost
 
.
Yet India Hasn't.

---------- Post added at 05:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:38 PM ----------

It's up to the Sri Lankan people who they Want India or China, they seem to have a better perception of China then India(for obvious reasons) :)
 
. . .
Indeed also Chinese weaponry was used to crush the Tamils Tigers , China also blocked sanctions. including funding many projects in Lanka.

Chinese billions in Sri Lanka fund battle against Tamil Tigers - Democratic Underground

China may have funded projects, but the Indian armed forces gave their blood, treasure and lives figthing the LTTE. At its peak, a hundred thousand Indian soldiers were defending Sri lanka from these tamil tigers. You can't beat that. Ask the LTTE whom they regard as their enemy - there is a reason they assasinated a former Indian prime minister.

Read about operation pawan for example, when Indian soldiers killed more than 2000 LTTE terrorists. So if you are talking about help against the LTTE, you can't beat India's contribution.

Operation Pawan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:
"In brutal fighting lasting about three weeks, the IPKF took control of the Jaffna Peninsula from the LTTE, something that the Sri Lankan army had tried and failed to achieve for several years. Supported by Indian Army tanks, helicopter gunships and heavy artillery, the IPKF routed the LTTE, at the cost of 214 soldiers."
 
.
China may have funded projects, but the Indian armed forces gave their blood, treasure and lives figthing the LTTE. At its peak, a hundred thousand Indian soldiers were defending Sri lanka from these tamil tigers. You can't beat that. Ask the LTTE whom they regard as their enemy - there is a reason they assasinated a former Indian prime minister.

Read about operation pawan for example, when Indian soldiers killed more than 2000 LTTE terrorists. So if you are talking about help against the LTTE, you can't beat India's contribution.

Operation Pawan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:
"In brutal fighting lasting about three weeks, the IPKF took control of the Jaffna Peninsula from the LTTE, something that the Sri Lankan army had tried and failed to achieve for several years. Supported by Indian Army tanks, helicopter gunships and heavy artillery, the IPKF routed the LTTE, at the cost of 214 soldiers."

You lost 2000 of your men you accomplished noting except getting your prime minister assassinated and losing 2000 of your men you also funded the tigers, in the end Sri Lanka Defeated the Tigers not India, Let India and China keep investing to outdo each other in Sri Lanka, in the end Sri Lanka will be the winner.
 
.
You lost 2000 of your men you accomplished noting except getting your prime minister assassinated and losing 2000 of your men you also funded the tigers, in the end Sri Lanka Defeated the Tigers not India, Let India and China keep investing to outdo each other in Sri Lanka, in the end Sri Lanka will be the winner.

Yes we lost 2000 of our men in the entire IPKF saga, but not for nothing. The total number of LTTE personell killed by Indian operations is about 11,000. Yes, in the end it was Sri lanka that defeated the tigers. But India's contribution is not insignificant by any means, and is definitely more than China's insofar as fighting the LTTE is concerned. That was my point.

So your remark that we accomplished nothing except getting our ex PM assasinated is plain bull. 11,000 insurgents killed and Jaffna peninsula captured and handed over to Sri Lanka is an achievement any military can be proud of. Note that Sri lanka had tried that for years unsuccesfully.
 
.
Yes we lost 2000 of our men in the entire IPKF saga, but not for nothing. The total number of LTTE personell killed by Indian operations is about 11,000. Yes, in the end it was Sri lanka that defeated the tigers. But India's contribution is not insignificant by any means, and is definitely more than China's insofar as fighting the LTTE is concerned. That was my point.

So your remark that we accomplished nothing except getting our ex PM assasinated is plain bull. 11,000 insurgents killed and Jaffna peninsula captured and handed over to Sri Lanka is an achievement any military can be proud of. Note that Sri lanka had tried that for years unsuccesfully.

killing the 11,000 didn't stop the tigers they got more recruits and fighters I'm not denying that india played a part rather a unsuccessful part, Sri Lanka thought talks could end the fighting however went in for an all out fight to the death with the tigers, India once funded the Tigers remember that now. they been unsuccessful however in 2009 they were successful in destroying LTTE. Basically the LTTE -Sri Lanka war was a mini Proxy war and the Chinese won that.
 
.
killing the 11,000 didn't stop the tigers they got more recruits and fighters I'm not denying that india played a part rather a unsuccessful part, Sri Lanka thought talks could end the fighting however went in for an all out fight to the death with the tigers, India once funded the Tigers remember that now. they been unsuccessful however in 2009 they were successful in destroying LTTE. Basically the LTTE was a mini Proxy war and the Chinese won that.

Wait, it was a mini proxy war between who exactly? You know what proxy war means, don't you? Two people figthing on behalf of two other people - like the war between north and south vietnam is said to have evolved into a proxy war between USA and USSR. So the war between LTTE and Sri Lanka was a proxy war between who, according to you?

Sri lankans will be very surprised to hear that china won the Sri lankan civil war. As far as I know it was a civil war, not a proxy war between two larger players. So explain that statement to me.
 
.
Wait, it was a mini proxy war between who exactly? You know what proxy war means, don't you? Two people figthing on behalf of two other people - like the war between north and south vietnam is said to have evolved into a proxy war between USA and USSR. So the war between LTTE and Sri Lanka was a proxy war between who, according to you?

Sri lankans will be very surprised to hear that china won the Sri lankan civil war.

Why India and China trying gain more influence ,Lankans won the war however Chinese gained more Influence. now lets get back to the main topic shall we ? India Must Kick China out of Sri Lanka but can it ? that's the million dollar question. the article talks of a Proxy like battle to gain influence between China and India.
 
.
Why India and China trying gain more influence ,Lankans won the war however Chinese gained more Influence. now lets get back to the main topic shall we ? India Must Kick China out of Sri Lanka but can it ? that's the million dollar question. the article talks of a Proxy like battle to gain influence between China and India.

Well simple reason is that Lanka make friendship with China to counter Indian influence just like all small countries doing with USA ....
 
.
Well simple reason is that Lanka make friendship with China to counter Indian influence just like all small countries doing with USA ....

Very well stated you understand that now. that means India cannot not Kick China out of Sri Lanka or does it ?
 
.
Why India and China trying gain more influence ,Lankans won the war however Chinese gained more Influence. now lets get back to the main topic shall we ? India Must Kick China out of Sri Lanka but can it ? that's the million dollar question.

So I take it that the statement of yours that it was a proxy war was made out of ignorance of the term proxy war.

Coming back to the topic, there is no reason for India to kick China out or the other way round. Both countries can invest in Sri lanka, to the benefit of all three parties involved. Unless we are talking about military bases or activities that are inimical to India's or China's interest, I don't see why there should be any conflict. Sri Lanka doesn't have to choose between one or the other, they can welcome Indian as well as Chinese investment.

Neither India nor China has any plans to build, say a naval base in Sri Lanka.
 
.
So I take it that that statement of yours that it was a proxy war was made out of ignorance of the term proxy war.

Coming back to the topic, there is no reason for India to kick China out or the other way round. Both countries can invest in Sri lanka, to the benefit of all three parties involved. Unless we are talking about military bases or activities that are inimical to India's or China's interest, I don't see why there should be any conflict. Sri Lanka doesn;t have to choose between one or the other, they can welcome Indian as well as Chinese investment.

Neither India nor China has any plans to build, say a naval base in Sri Lanka.

Proxy for Influence simple during the conflict. If India and China both asked for a Perm Naval base in Lanka who do you think will get it ?
 
.
Proxy for Influence simple during the conflict. If India and China both asked for a Perm Naval base in Lanka who do you think will get it ?

Neither. Sri Lanka is not stupid enough to earn the enemity of either country by giving the other a naval base. And Sri lanka doesn't want its sovereignity compromised by foreign military bases on its soil. So unless such a situation actually materialises, we don't need to speculate.

And neither India nor China is going to ask for such a drastic measure in the foreseeable future. Maintaining a permanent naval base far away from the homeland is not child's play. There is a reason why only the USA can afford such measures, or needs to.
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom