What's new

Opinionated - Does Pakistan Matter?

Pakistan's role in relation building with Mao's China and Nixon is overstated.

In the late 1960's the Soviets offered Nixon a graceful exit from Vietnam in return for assistance in neutralising China's nuclear program. Kissinger leaked the Soviet plans to Mao via the Chinese Embassy in Warsaw earning him a personal clandestine visit with an ailing Chairman Mao via a secret PAF flight into Beijing in 1971 and the rest as they say is history.

Remember Indian troops clubbed to death by PLA in 2020, similar events were a daily occurrence on the Sino-Soviet border in the late 60's eventually resulting in a brief border war in 69.

This is one-sided story. No confirmation from Soviet nor US.

1645955624642.png


用基辛格的话来说,在会谈的过程中完全没有谈到关于同苏联的关系问题。只是有一次,当周恩来在谈论关于中国人热爱和平的时候,他提到了苏联领导人,他说,苏联领导人喜欢把毛泽东及其战友想象为“挑起新的世界大战的原子弹狂热主义者”。此外再也没有提到苏联。

基辛格提到了关于美国报刊和美国一些观察家的报道,这些报道说,周恩来曾告诉他说,苏联可能对中国进行军事入侵,或者对中国进行先发制人的核打击,对于这种威胁周恩来非常担心。这些报道都“纯粹是对舆论的操弄”。

总的来说,同中国总理周恩来进行的会谈给他留下了强烈的印象:相比苏联来说,中国人现在更加担心日本。对于日本经济的迅速发展,中国人非常紧张。他们相信,日本人暗藏着一股潜在的复仇情绪,这种情绪非常强烈,并且,他们显然很担心日本成为一个核大国。相应地,他们同时也在批判美国同日本结成军事同盟,他们表示,希望美国把日本的行为控制在一定的范围内,不要让其越过一定的界限。

就印度支那问题,其中包括就柬埔寨、老挝和越南问题进行的讨论在这次会谈中占据了重要的地位。就越南问题进行了详细的讨论。



1645955594556.png



柯西金与周恩来会谈记录:维持边界现状避免武装冲突 [5] (1969年9月11日)

周恩来同意柯西金对中苏关系重要性的评价,声称:我们应当力求中苏关系正常化,找到解决各种问题的途径,缓和紧张局势,从而不给帝国主义因中苏关系紧张而兴高采烈的机会。他声称,中心的问题是边界问题。这个问题还早在没有共产党的时候形成的,当时我们两国人民都处于无权的地位,但如果我们能把这个问题解决了,这当然很好。在边界上发生的冲突,不是因为我们的过错才发生的,我们很清楚这一点。要解决这个问题,这就意味着要停止边界上的武装冲突,双方军队都必须撤出争议地区。我们不想打仗,我们正在进行文化革命,我们为什么要发动战争呢?我们在国外没有任何军队,并且我们也不希望在国外驻扎军队。我们两国之间存在着政治紧张状态。美国开动整个宣传机器,意在使我们两国发生冲突。苏联在远东、在哈萨克斯坦都集结了军队。你们的飞机在那里飞行,那里有我们的飞机。我们没有主动搞边界式的冲突,并且在任何情况下我们都不会挑起冲突。我们试验核武器只是为了打破核垄断,并且我们已经声明:无论在任何情况下我们都将不首先使用核武器。现在,周恩来继续说,正在流传着有可能对中国的核武器生产基地进行先发制人的打击的传说。我们不希望事态如此发展并建议召开会议,以便禁止这种武器。所有这些问题都应当通过谈判、通过和平途径加以解决,并且我想能够找到解决边界问题的途径。周恩来再次强调,应当使争议地区摆脱双方军队在那里的存在。苏联方面说,在新疆,边界的走向是向东,而我们说是向西,于是就形成了争议地区。像我们所建议的那种摆脱这种局面的出路是能够找到的。应当解决这些问题,缓和我们相互关系中的紧张情况,从而不给帝国主义为紧张局势的加剧而兴高采烈之机。苏联方面,周恩来继续说,7月26日给我们发来了同级会晤的信件。这项建议是在我们两国关系最紧张的时刻提出的,因此我们没有采纳你们的建议。我们不能同意葛罗米柯在最高苏维埃会议上的报告。不能把意识形态问题的分歧转移至国家关系方面。关于在新疆的冲突,我们认为,发生武装冲突的那个地区在我们一边,而你们却认为是在自己那边并在那里打死了我们20名战士。中国没有任何要把你们的军队赶出这些地区的意图,我们为什么要这么干呢?但是,阿穆尔河和乌苏里江上的那些有争议的岛屿是我们的,并且我们的人历来都在这些岛屿上从事生产活动。

仔细听完了对话人的话之后,柯西金同意此时把边界问题放在首位加以讨论。针对周恩来的关于中国任何人都不希望战争的议论,柯西金宣称:在苏联,无论是苏共还是苏联政府,无论在任何地方和任何一份文件中都没有号召人民进行战争,在任何地方都没有告诉人民:勒紧腰带,准备打仗!而是相反,总是讲要和平。我们懂得,中华人民共和国国内有许多事情,因此,要发动战争就是冒险主义。当然,谁也不相信中国人在准备战争。
 
.
This is one-sided story. No confirmation from Soviet nor US.

View attachment 819249

用基辛格的话来说,在会谈的过程中完全没有谈到关于同苏联的关系问题。只是有一次,当周恩来在谈论关于中国人热爱和平的时候,他提到了苏联领导人,他说,苏联领导人喜欢把毛泽东及其战友想象为“挑起新的世界大战的原子弹狂热主义者”。此外再也没有提到苏联。

基辛格提到了关于美国报刊和美国一些观察家的报道,这些报道说,周恩来曾告诉他说,苏联可能对中国进行军事入侵,或者对中国进行先发制人的核打击,对于这种威胁周恩来非常担心。这些报道都“纯粹是对舆论的操弄”。

总的来说,同中国总理周恩来进行的会谈给他留下了强烈的印象:相比苏联来说,中国人现在更加担心日本。对于日本经济的迅速发展,中国人非常紧张。他们相信,日本人暗藏着一股潜在的复仇情绪,这种情绪非常强烈,并且,他们显然很担心日本成为一个核大国。相应地,他们同时也在批判美国同日本结成军事同盟,他们表示,希望美国把日本的行为控制在一定的范围内,不要让其越过一定的界限。

就印度支那问题,其中包括就柬埔寨、老挝和越南问题进行的讨论在这次会谈中占据了重要的地位。就越南问题进行了详细的讨论。



View attachment 819248


柯西金与周恩来会谈记录:维持边界现状避免武装冲突 [5] (1969年9月11日)

周恩来同意柯西金对中苏关系重要性的评价,声称:我们应当力求中苏关系正常化,找到解决各种问题的途径,缓和紧张局势,从而不给帝国主义因中苏关系紧张而兴高采烈的机会。他声称,中心的问题是边界问题。这个问题还早在没有共产党的时候形成的,当时我们两国人民都处于无权的地位,但如果我们能把这个问题解决了,这当然很好。在边界上发生的冲突,不是因为我们的过错才发生的,我们很清楚这一点。要解决这个问题,这就意味着要停止边界上的武装冲突,双方军队都必须撤出争议地区。我们不想打仗,我们正在进行文化革命,我们为什么要发动战争呢?我们在国外没有任何军队,并且我们也不希望在国外驻扎军队。我们两国之间存在着政治紧张状态。美国开动整个宣传机器,意在使我们两国发生冲突。苏联在远东、在哈萨克斯坦都集结了军队。你们的飞机在那里飞行,那里有我们的飞机。我们没有主动搞边界式的冲突,并且在任何情况下我们都不会挑起冲突。我们试验核武器只是为了打破核垄断,并且我们已经声明:无论在任何情况下我们都将不首先使用核武器。现在,周恩来继续说,正在流传着有可能对中国的核武器生产基地进行先发制人的打击的传说。我们不希望事态如此发展并建议召开会议,以便禁止这种武器。所有这些问题都应当通过谈判、通过和平途径加以解决,并且我想能够找到解决边界问题的途径。周恩来再次强调,应当使争议地区摆脱双方军队在那里的存在。苏联方面说,在新疆,边界的走向是向东,而我们说是向西,于是就形成了争议地区。像我们所建议的那种摆脱这种局面的出路是能够找到的。应当解决这些问题,缓和我们相互关系中的紧张情况,从而不给帝国主义为紧张局势的加剧而兴高采烈之机。苏联方面,周恩来继续说,7月26日给我们发来了同级会晤的信件。这项建议是在我们两国关系最紧张的时刻提出的,因此我们没有采纳你们的建议。我们不能同意葛罗米柯在最高苏维埃会议上的报告。不能把意识形态问题的分歧转移至国家关系方面。关于在新疆的冲突,我们认为,发生武装冲突的那个地区在我们一边,而你们却认为是在自己那边并在那里打死了我们20名战士。中国没有任何要把你们的军队赶出这些地区的意图,我们为什么要这么干呢?但是,阿穆尔河和乌苏里江上的那些有争议的岛屿是我们的,并且我们的人历来都在这些岛屿上从事生产活动。

仔细听完了对话人的话之后,柯西金同意此时把边界问题放在首位加以讨论。针对周恩来的关于中国任何人都不希望战争的议论,柯西金宣称:在苏联,无论是苏共还是苏联政府,无论在任何地方和任何一份文件中都没有号召人民进行战争,在任何地方都没有告诉人民:勒紧腰带,准备打仗!而是相反,总是讲要和平。我们懂得,中华人民共和国国内有许多事情,因此,要发动战争就是冒险主义。当然,谁也不相信中国人在准备战争。
Thanks for the explanation 👍🏻
 
.
Pakistan's role in relation building with Mao's China and Nixon is overstated.

In the late 1960's the Soviets offered Nixon a graceful exit from Vietnam in return for assistance in neutralising China's nuclear program. Kissinger leaked the Soviet plans to Mao via the Chinese Embassy in Warsaw earning him a personal clandestine visit with an ailing Chairman Mao via a secret PAF flight into Beijing in 1971 and the rest as they say is history.

Remember Indian troops clubbed to death by PLA in 2020, similar events were a daily occurrence on the Sino-Soviet border in the late 60's eventually resulting in a brief border war in 69.






Over 730 million open defecators would agree with you..........:azn::

 
. .
This is one-sided story. No confirmation from Soviet nor US.

You think the Russians will call a press conference and fess up to planning to blow up your nuclear research facility? The Russians were loathed to contend with China as an equal. Did you know that Stalin made Mao wait four weeks in a dacha in Moscow before agreeing to meet him? A power play to make sure Mao knew who was boss... :lol:
 
Last edited:
.
We must be realistic and increase our strength instead of Haqeeqat TV making up stories about Pakistan ki Haan aur Naan main Dunya ke faisle hotay hain.

I honestly do not know what you mean, or what haqeeqat tv is.

I think you fail to understand, I have not made any claims about anything, the points I highlighted are historical facts, why is it wrong to recognise them as such? It's not about making any claims, and there's noting wrong with recognising history.
 
.
China thanks Pakistan for its help. Long live the friendship between China and Pakistan. Will not interfere in Pakistan's internal and foreign affairs. It is hoped that the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor project will help Pakistan's rapid economic development, and China will certainly build Gwadar into Pakistan's economic center and the next Dubai.
 
.
Why are you asking empty questions?
Is there a level grandeur and delusion in your approach and mind-set?

Why are you rejecting facts without basis?
Isn't it childish to contribute to a discussion only with questions like a nursery student?


If you have something to say, they say it, time to grow up.

You could read your own post and comments. Look in the mirror

The main theater was Eastern Europe. Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe was the main cause of the cold war. Soviet pullout from Eastern Europe ended it
Grow up and tell us what did Pakistan contribute here
 
.
You could read your own post and comments. Look in the mirror

The main theater was Eastern Europe. Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe was the main cause of the cold war. Soviet pullout from Eastern Europe ended it
Grow up and tell us what did Pakistan contribute here

lol you're a joker.
My post is very clear, what's there to be confused about? You just need a brain.


The thread is about something else, and you are raising totally irrelevant points that have nothing to do with the topic in this thread. How does that make sense?
What are you, a moron?

Stop acting like a troll.
 
.
lol you're a joker.
My post is very clear, what's there to be confused about? You just need a brain.


The thread is about something else, and you are raising totally irrelevant points that have nothing to do with the topic in this thread. How does that make sense?
What are you, a moron?

Stop acting like a troll.

"America vs. the Soviet Union in the cold war
>> America won, supported by > PAKISTAN"

This is your comment
 
.
"America vs. the Soviet Union in the cold war
>> America won, supported by > PAKISTAN"

This is your comment

First I will appreciate you don't troll me in other threads, don't be a child.


Was it so hard to be clear?
The cold war existed all over the world, it wasn't limited to Europe.
In which world are you living in?
Which history books did you read?

One of the fronts in the cold war was South/Central Asia.
So your point is irrelevant.
 
.
First I will appreciate you don't troll me in other threads, don't be a child.


Was it so hard to be clear?
The cold war existed all over the world, it wasn't limited to Europe.
In which world are you living in?
Which history books did you read?

One of the fronts in the cold war was South/Central Asia.
So your point is irrelevant.

The central front of the cold war is Eastern Europe. The secondary theater has always been East Asia. Tell us what strength of Red Army in Eastern Europe versus the strength in Afghanistan. When Berlin wall fell and communist regimes of Eastern Europe fell the cold war ended.

nobody cared about communist regimes of Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Angola, Mozambique, Cuba, Nicaragua, Afghanistan. A lot of them are still in power. With the exception of Cuba USA has normal relationships with all of them.

The Middle East became important because of oil. It still is

All the other areas are side shows - South Asia, South East Asia, Africa and Latin America.
 
.
I posted something similar a long time ago, the last time I was on this forum.
Somehow, it feels like an apt moment to repeat and review the truth behind this statement.

Considering Pakistan always seems to be in the limelight for one reason or another.
Let us judge, how influential Pakistan has been in our region, following are my conclusions, which perhaps are a little foretelling of the future.



America vs. the Soviet Union in the cold war
>> America won, supported by > PAKISTAN

America wanted to have good relations with China
>> America did, supported by > PAKISTAN

America wanted to defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan
>> America did, supported by > PAKISTAN

India, Russia, Iran, CAR’s, all Afghan groups against the Taliban
>> Taliban won, supported by > PAKISTAN

American Invasion of Afghanistan vs. Taliban
>> Taliban won, supported by > PAKISTAN

Russia vs. America (Europeans are just puppets, they don't count)
>> to be decided by CHINA > possibly supported by PAKISTAN

America vs. China
>> To be decided, who will be supported by > PAKISTAN


It seems the only side that keeps winning is the side that is supported by PAKISTAN.

You forget the Tamil tiger defeat where Pakistan defeated India in it's backyard via proxy in Sri Lanka
 
.
The central front of the cold war is Eastern Europe. The secondary theater has always been East Asia. Tell us what strength of Red Army in Eastern Europe versus the strength in Afghanistan. When Berlin wall fell and communist regimes of Eastern Europe fell the cold war ended.

nobody cared about communist regimes of Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Angola, Mozambique, Cuba, Nicaragua, Afghanistan. A lot of them are still in power. With the exception of Cuba USA has normal relationships with all of them.

The Middle East became important because of oil. It still is

All the other areas are side shows - South Asia, South East Asia, Africa and Latin America.

This discussion has gone from dull to idiotic.
I really do not understand why you are so confused, so I am going to spell it out for you assuming you are a child.

The cold war was between two opposing camps, one camp was led by the Soviets with communist as it's ideology, the other camp was led by America with democracy and capitalism as the central ideology.

Countries were largely in either of these two camps, some were suppose to be non-aligned, but that was nothing but a smoke screen.

Pakistan was in the American camp.

The cold war started in Europe right after the second world war, but very soon it spread across the world, because both camps tried their best to spread their sphere of influence.
Although it had start in Europe but soon Europe became very quiet and most of the action happened around the world.

The Korean war, the Vietnam war and the Afghanistan wars were conducted under the shadow of the cold war. Each camp solidifying their positions. So, although it started in Europe, but bulk of the action from the 1950s onwards happened mainly in other parts of the world, where people died in their millions and governments were toppled, such things did not happen at such a scale in Europe, after the initial period of instability.

Pakistan being in the American camp, joined two regional alliances, specifically designed to halt any aggression by the Soviet Union and it's allies, SEATO (1954-77) and CENTO (1955-79). Pakistan also provided very close cooperation to the Americans, which included military installations and bases, among them an airbase near Peshawar from which to conduct spy operation over the Soviet Union.

It was a flight from this airbase that resulted in the Gary Powers incident, and bought the anger and wrath of the Soviet Union on Pakistan. So, in it's part of the world Pakistan played a major role in the fight against communism.

Then the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, which eventually bankrupt the Soviets and resulted in the breakup of the Soviet Union, Pakistan was central to that effort. Pakistan play an important part in the cold war, in it's part of the world. Pakistan's role was central to the effort against Soviet aggression.

Without the efforts made by Pakistan, the Soviet Union would probably have survived by introducing reforms like China. The process of "Glasnost and perestroika" was part of the reforms effort. But I am not dealing with conjecture, but facts.

You can hear the facts from the horses mouth, Hillary Clinton acknowledging Pakistan's role.

It's already plainly obvious, because it's historical fact, but some people such as yourself, choose to be wilfully blind.

 
.
This discussion has gone from dull to idiotic.
I really do not understand why you are so confused, so I am going to spell it out for you assuming you are a child.

Then the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, which eventually bankrupt the Soviets and resulted in the breakup of the Soviet Union, Pakistan was central to that effort. Pakistan play an important part in the cold war, in it's part of the world. Pakistan's role was central to the effort against Soviet aggression.

Soviets have a 5.3 million man military. They have 1 million plus forces in the European theater.
The strength of Soviet forces in Afghanistan are 130,000. I will let you figure out how it bankrupts the USSR

Pakistan was under military dictatorship during most of the cold war. I will let you figure out the priorities
 
.
Back
Top Bottom