PLA Presence in Northern Areas ? ? ?

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Selig Harrison's credibility is in doubt, as is that of the NYT when it reports on international issues that involve US foreign policy and US strategic interests, as illustrated by its role in the propagation of the WMD in Iraq lies. That NYT bias can also be seen in how its editorial board allows publishing of reports alleging Pakistani State support for the taliban without a shred of conclusive evidence, and chooses to under-report the various voices, from the US, pointing out the lack of such evidence.

Selig Harrison developed close relationships with several Baluch sardars and militants in the seventies when he spent a great deal of time in Baluchistan and wrote his book by the same name. He has, ever since, been vehemently anti-Pakistan and in essence advocated for its dissolution, and this bias and agenda has been picked up by other foreign journalists as well. This excerpt is from Pakistan's Security Under Zia, 1977-1988 by Robert Wirsing

"More common, however, was the view that Pakistan had never been a viable state, that brute force was all that held it together, and that the United States, in supplying its governmant with the arms to repress dissent, was exposing itself t considerable risk of guilt by association. No one more tirelessly advanced these themes than the Carnegie Endowment's long time South Asia-watcher, Selig Harrison. "As the Bengali's still bitterly recall," Harrison reminded his listeners in congressional hearings on the Reagan administrations proposed aid package in 1981, "it was American weaponry that the Pakistan Army used against them. Similarly, when the Baluch staged and insurgency of their own in 1973, Islamabad once again turned its US Equipment not against invading Communist forces, but against its own people. It took 80,000 Pakistani trops four years to subdue the Baluch, despite repeated strafing attacks on the Baluch villages by US fighter planes received under the military aid program and by Huey-Cobra helicopters borrowed from the Shah of Iran." In an articel published in 1978, Harrison had written that " at the height of the fighting in late 1974, American supplied Iranian combat helicopters provided the key to victory in a crucial battle at Chamalang in early September when a force of some 17000 guerrillas of the Marri tribe, was decimated."

Harrison's claim was factually inaccurate and highly misleading. By 1970, Chinese-supplied aircaft made up "33 percent of the Pakistan Air Force's 270 planes, 65 percent of all the interceptor-bombers, and 90 percent of the first-line modern fighter planes at its disposal." These percentages rose even higher in the first few years of the 1970's (prior to the outbreak of the Baloch insurgency) with large Chinese transfers to Pakistan of the Shanyang F-6 (mig 19). The sinification of PAF's inventory was clearly in an advanced stage when the insurgency broke out in Baluchistan in 1973. To the extent that the air force was involved at all in the fighting in Baluchistan, the probability was slight that it would have used its Korean War vintage F-86 Sabre jets and not its newer and far more numerous Chinese aricraft. AS for the Huey-Cobra helicopter gunships, no armed helicopters of any kind were used by the Pakistan army against the Baluch insurgents. Pakistan had none of its own at that time, and the Shah loaned Pakistan only a small number (most sources say ten, but estimates range as high as thirty) of unarmed, Iranian piloted Chinook transport helicopters. These, according to well infromed sources, played an extremely minor role in the fighting and were returned to Iran in may 1974 after only eight months or so in Baluchistan. They played absolutely no role, incidentally, in the battle at Chamalang, which took place months after the Iranian helicopters had been withdrawn.

Though its authenticity was questionable at best, Harrison's evocative tale of the gunship helicopters was picked up and repeated for years thereafter by a wide variety of commentators on Pakistan. The picture he painted of the dread American killer cobras raining death upon the practically defenseless Baluch insurgents inevitably made a powerful impression in a population that had only a few years earlier forced its government that abandoned a much bloodier counterinsurgency war in Vietnam....

Selig Harrison's bias and constant vilification of Pakistan is also easily established by reading through his various articles on Pakistan and the language he uses. It is correct therefore to take his comments about the events in G-B with a large degree of skepticism given his established anti-Pakistan bias and agenda.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

An Member of European Parliament (MEP) Ryszard Czarnecki, was recently denied permission to visit Gilgit Baltistan.

Given that the MEP Czarnecki has made statements like the following:

Ryszard Czarnecki, a member of European Parliament from Poland, said that Pakistan came into existence through restrictive voting and is being ruled by the Punjabi army. He said that the Baluchs are a distinct ethnic group and not part of Pakistan.

He said that the Pakistani army is pursuing a policy of Baluch genocide as described in the reports of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan. The Pakistani army should stop this operation and stop building military cantonments in Baluchistan for the purpose of subjugating Baluch people. He said that Baluch nationalists were fiercely opposed to the national assembly.

He said that currently gross violations of human rights are taking place in Baluchistan under the hands of Pakistan military. He gave an example of army attack on Dera Bugti where 85% killed were women and children. He said the international community condemn these human rights violations and demand from Pakistan to stop these immediately.
http://fpc.org.uk/articles/369

It is no surprise that Pakistan refused a visa to an individual with an obvious bias and agenda against Pakistan. Certainly individuals with a clean track record and a desire for objective reporting instead of spouting propaganda to advance an agenda against the Pakistani State would be welcome and are welcome, as pointed out by TK.

 

[TaimiKhan]

Selig Harrison's credibility is in doubt, as is that of the NYT when it reports on international issues that involve US foreign policy and US strategic interests, as illustrated by its role in the propagation of the WMD in Iraq lies. That NYT bias can also be seen in how its editorial board allows publishing of reports alleging Pakistani State support for the taliban without a shred of conclusive evidence, and chooses to under-report the various voices, from the US, pointing out the lack of such evidence.

Selig Harrison developed close relationships with several Baluch sardars and militants in the seventies when he spent a great deal of time in Baluchistan and wrote his book by the same name. He has, ever since, been vehemently anti-Pakistan and in essence advocated for its dissolution, and this bias and agenda has been picked up by other foreign journalists as well. This excerpt is from Pakistan's Security Under Zia, 1977-1988 by Robert Wirsing

Selig Harrison's bias and constant vilification of Pakistan is also easily established by reading through his various articles on Pakistan and the language he uses. It is correct therefore to take his comments about the events in G-B with a large degree of skepticism given his established anti-Pakistan bias and agenda.

Given that the MEP Czarnecki has made statements like the following:

Ryszard Czarnecki, a member of European Parliament from Poland, said that Pakistan came into existence through restrictive voting and is being ruled by the Punjabi army. He said that the Baluchs are a distinct ethnic group and not part of Pakistan.

He said that the Pakistani army is pursuing a policy of Baluch genocide as described in the reports of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan. The Pakistani army should stop this operation and stop building military cantonments in Baluchistan for the purpose of subjugating Baluch people. He said that Baluch nationalists were fiercely opposed to the national assembly.

He said that currently gross violations of human rights are taking place in Baluchistan under the hands of Pakistan military. He gave an example of army attack on Dera Bugti where 85% killed were women and children. He said the international community condemn these human rights violations and demand from Pakistan to stop these immediately.
Foreign Policy Centre: Articles / Baluchistan at the Crossroads

It is no surprise that Pakistan refused a visa to an individual with an obvious bias and agenda against Pakistan. Certainly individuals with a clean track record and a desire for objective reporting instead of spouting propaganda to advance an agenda against the Pakistani State would be welcome and are welcome, as pointed out by TK.

Well that settles it and buries the hatch which was not even opened

Thanks Agno for your much valuable input and showing what these two people hold in their dirty minds for Pakistan.

 

[CardSharp]

Yes indeed it is not a hard & fast historical rule, that's precisely why i used the word "Usually". Let me be more specific - "successful armed insurgencies have come up with external support". The examples are all around for us to see, Kashmir, Afghanistan, Vietnam etc..

India's ineffective COIN efforts? Hate to say this my friend but i guess that you are not fully aware of latest developments in this field. As with terrorism in Kashmir the Indian Army has done a very good job nearly eradicating the menace. As regard's to the Maoist problem, yes till date the COIN operations have been a mixture of failure & success. While this phenomenon has been nearly eradicated in certain states it is rather active and blossoming in a few other. But this large scale Maoist insurgence is a recent phenomena and efforts are being made to tackle it, we will see the results in the near future.

As for the alleged Chinese support to the Maoist, India's Home Minister is on record saying that with the current intelligence available with him there is no proof that China is backing the insurgents. So where is the ambiguity? As of now GoI is not pointing a finger at China and that is good enough to convince me.







You are simply inferring things from my post. I never said that the bomb explosion in Xinjiang was not terrorism. I mere pointed it out as proof towards the existence on an armed insurgency. Don't confuse the two. If i am endorsing a point doesn't me that i am automatically negating its opposite.






Nixon's policy change had a major impact on the armed rebellion. I will take your word for it that PLA might have been largely successful in neutralizing the insurgency. But only in the absence of American support did the insurgency completely die down.






I am largely in agreement with you on the highlighted part. Indeed the level of insurgency that exists in India is much larger than what is happening in China. But they are many reasons to it. Let me not get into them for it will not serve any purpose and we will also be deviating from the topic at hand.

Secondly whom am i blaming & for what? Didn't quiet get you there. As far as i remember, i had mere point out that armed insurgence's only blossom with external support. How is that blaming anyone?

As for the italics part. Indeed the external support by state actors is not "invulnerable", but there are certain limitations to it. While China has been fortunate in this regard that Pakistan listens to it when it comes to Uighur's using the terror infrastructure present there, while India has been less fortunate. Either the Pakistanis understand that they cant afford to piss off two giants at once or either they are indeed grateful to China for gifting them with Nuke & Missile tech. The truth is somewhere between the two. They sympathies with the Uighur's but cant afford not have Chinese support.

India is not so fortunate in this case. Either we make them understand by talking to them that Terror will not help (as the current government is doing) or we make war. I don't see either of these options helping. The mistrust simply runs too deep, largely on the part of Islamabad than New Delhi.

I'm not going to bother besides saying that you obsession with outside support is a largely a result of an experience with India's insurgency and that the vast majority of historical armed rebellions have no outside support.


And also Uighurs and Pakistan? you do realize that they are Turkic and central Asian and that's there support base outside of China right?

 

[Spring Onion]

Just posting SG post here quite on the topic

Selig Harrison and Pakistan Media​

A column in the New York Times newspaper by American commentator Selig Harrison has raised quite a bit of media attention around a conspiracy theory that the government is giving Gilgit Baltistan to China, a claim publicly denied by the Foreign Office. As with most conspiracy theories of this magnitude, a little basic research demonstrates that Mr Harrison and his claim of Pakistan ceding territory to China are unreliable.

While it took me all of 15 minutes to discover that Mr Harrison’s reputation precedes his remarks in the US, our own media seems to be more than willing to repeat the wildest conspiracies without the least effort in fact-checking. More troubling is that the Mr Harrison’s conspiracy seems to have been fed to him in part by Pakistani media.

The first suspicion I had about Mr Harrison’s claim was that it was simply too outrageous to be believed without some proof. Of course, Mr Harrison provides none in his column.

Most troubling, as I said, is that Mr Harrison’s claim appears to be based at least in part on rumours by unnamed journalists. He says that his sources for this conspiracy theory are:



First, what foreign intelligence sources? While it would certainly be in keeping with journalistic practice to hold confidential the name of an informant, it is not unusual to at least report what agency the informant is associated with. Without playing into alternate conspiracy theories, it is well documented that intelligence agencies partake in disinformation campaigns designed to sow discord in targeted nations. Considering the location in question, is it not important to know which foreign intelligence agency is making these claims?

Second, it is quite troubling that some representatives of Pakistani media have been feeding such stories to foreign reporters. Considering Mr Harrison’s background (as we will explain below), it is worrisome that these Pakistani journalists went to Mr Harrison to promote their story. Certainly Mr Harrison will refuse to expose who these Pakistani journalists are, which is too bad. While there is reason to protect the identities of “whistle blowers” against official corruption for fear of their safety, there is little public good gained by allowing journalists to spread unsubstantiated rumours.

But let’s look at Mr Harrison’s claims directly. Many of Mr Harrison’s claims are nothing more than hysterical conjecture.



I could not help but think of the famous American claims about Iraq’s “aluminum tubes”. The idea that China, which shares a border with China, would need to store missiles under Gilgit-Balochistan makes no sense. Unfortunately for Mr Harrison’s conspiracy theory, though, building tunnels for a gas pipeline would be a perfectly reasonable explanation for an increased presence of Chinese workers in the region. It’s just not quite as scary.

Of course, this is not the first claim that Mr Harrison has made about the break up of Pakistan. The Pakistan Policy Blog noticed this trend of Mr Harrison’s back in 2008, noting that “Selig Harrison has made a career of predicting the imminent break-up of South Asian states”. In 2006, Mr Harrison reported for the French newspaper Le Monde Diplomatique that Baluchistan and Sindh were preparing to quit the nation.

While there is no denying that we have seen groups of separatists and ethnic strife in the country (what country has not experienced such?), Mr Harrison’s reports consistently take on a tone of imminent national dissolution that is simply not supported by the facts. Four years after Mr Harrison’s prediction in the French media and no such calamity has occurred, of course. Yet Mr Harrison continues to predict the breakup of Pakistan. Perhaps he believes that if he simply wishes hard enough, it will come true?

Joshua Foust, a respected American journalist and intelligence consultant on South Asia, wrote a scathing profile of Mr Selig Harrison in 2008 in which he calls Mr Harrison’s writings on Pashtunistan, “silly, over-hyped nonsense” and says,



Today, of course, Mr Harrison is not talking only about a separatist rebellion, but he has added a twist by claiming the government is “handing over de facto control of the strategic Gilgit-Baltistan region in the northwest corner of disputed Kashmir to China”. His evidence? Chinese PLA workers building roads and bridges.

Mr Harrison’s column, it is important to note, appears on the Opinion page of the New York Times. It does not even pretend to be an objective or investigative report, nor should it. Mr Harrison makes clear his position when he writes,



This is a position in direct conflict with the official positions of the US and Pakistan. It is simply Mr Harrison’s opinion, and possibly an attempt to change the direction of Pakistan-US relations. Something, it seems, he has been trying to do for years.

An opinion column with no evidence, a discredited author, and sources from unnamed foreign intelligence agencies. One has to ask why the Pakistani media has been so ready to republish such rubbish. In fact, The News republished the piece in full today. The Nation makes note of the author’s “obsessive anti-Pakistan posture”, but then reproduces most of the author’s claims.

Worse still, who are the members of the Pakistani media who are feeding such conspiracy theories to foreign journalists? This blog has been criticized in the past for suggesting that there is a cycle in which Pakistani conspiracy theorists posing as journalists feed outrageous stories to the international press, who then repeat them, giving them the credibility needed to be repeated yet again in mainstream Pakistani media. But we see here an example of exactly this.

Actions of the media have consequences. Those consequences can be good – as when the media uncovers evidence of corruption or brings attention to pressing issues. Or they can be bad – as when the media causes confusion and distraction by placing more importance on sales than on research and facts. While we cannot control what discredited commentators like Selig Harrison write in the international media, we should not be fueling a cycle of misinformation and conspiracy theories. We should be setting an example of journalistic excellence that provides honest and accurate information at home and abroad.

Selig Harrison and Pakistan Media | Pakistan Media Watch

 

[shanixee]

The Bharatis are wringing their hands in frustration as they watch the Pakistanis and Chinese rapidly building the infrastructure for an engineering feat that will be a wonder of the world. As Pakistani and Chinese engineers build new links between Pakistan and China, and as the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Pakistani Army Corps of Engineers dig tunnels and expand the existing Karakoram highway, Delhi remains in panic. The frustration in Bharat is now translating into vague statements of “we are monitoring the situation”. What is funny is the fact that it took a lowly US reporter to identify the activity on the Pakistani-Chinese border. Bharat didn’t have a clue. It took Selig S Harrison, a US reporter to splash the news to the Bharati intelligence agencies and the Bharati Armed Forces.

The Indian Army has received confirmation that China deployed an infantry battalion of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) at the 15,397-feet Khunjerab Pass on the Karakoram highway this month for the security of its workers engaged in building a railroad. This railroad will eventually connect Xinjiang to the port of Gwadar in Balochistan, Pakistan.

The Khunjerab Pass straddles the border between China and *** and is 272 km from Gilgit in the Northern Areas. This PLA deployment is expected to be raised to brigade strength (3,000 troops) as work on the railroad progresses in the Northern Areas.

Writing in The New York Times — the article was carried by The Indian Express — Selig S Harrison, director of the Asia Program at the Center for International Policy, reported that 7,000-11,000 PLA troops are already in the Gilgit-Baltistan region.

The Indian Army brass has taken note of the deployment of 1,000 troops at Khunjerab Pass but is not unduly alarmed about the build-up

 

[A.Muqeet khan]

i was watching a bit of news a few days before it said that pakistan had moved third of its army from the indian pak border and (may be its a coincidence )that chinese came in those areas

 

[S_O_C_O_M]

Pakistan denies giving Gilgit Baltistan to China ​

Tuesday, 31 Aug, 2010

“The Chinese were working on landslide, flood hit areas and on the destroyed Korakoram Highway with the permission of Pakistani Government,” said Foreign Office spokesman Abdul Basit. – AFP Photo

ISLAMABAD: The Pakistan Foreign Office strongly denied the news propagated in the US and Indian media claiming that ‘Galgit Baltistan’ region had been handed over to China, on Tuesday.

“The Chinese were working on landslide, flood hit areas and on the destroyed Korakoram Highway with the permission of Pakistani Government,” said Foreign Office spokesman Abdul Basit.

Selig Harrison in his article, published in the New York Times, wrote that on invitation of the Pakistani government ‘seven to eleven thousand’ Chinese soldiers had entered Gilgit Baltistan area.

Referring to the article, Basit said “The statements are based on incomplete information. Harrison has an anti-Pakistan mindset and has tried to deform the facts in his article to sensitize the situation.” – DawnNews

DAWN.COM | Pakistan | Pakistan denies giving Gilgit Baltistan to China

 

[sergente rehan]

My reaction:



Useless even to point out the numerous idiotic statements & assumptions.

Just to make a point to let know how much the area is closed to outsiders:

"In recent years, the highway has become a destination for adventure tourism. It was ranked as the 3rd best Tourist Destination in Pakistan by The Guardian. The road has given mountaineers and cyclists easier access to the many high mountains, glaciers and lakes in the area. The highway provides access to Gilgit and Skardu from Islamabad by road. These are the two major hubs for mountaineering expeditions in the Gilgit-Baltistan region of Pakistan-administered Kashmir. "

Karakoram Highway - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The top five tourist sites in Pakistan | Travel | guardian.co.uk

More then enough to show the level of intellect and information this guy writing the article has.

This article is a total BS. I've worked on a project with an Italian NGO for 6 months. They are doing great job in Gilgit-Baltistan region and for the cultural heritage and livelihood of the local people. They are installing the weather monitoring cells on K-2 and on other high peaks. Army and GoP is also cooperating with them. In up comming years italian government alongside with GoP is planning to make Skardu an attractive place for the tourist from the hole world who loves mountains and skiing. They are building museums and many other tourist facilities to boost tourism in this region of Pakistan. I've hlped them in organizing an event at the NAG (national Art Gallery) Islamabad last year in December for the awareness of the people and what steps we have taken so far. The politacal worker which i often met said me that sometimes there was trouble in Gilgit-Baltistan region but it's all bcz of MQM and PPP workers which fight with each other...not as mentioned in the article and the cinese army was there only for security purposes of the personal involved in the construction projects. He also informed me that he used to travel to China only with his national ID card bcz residence of Gilgit-Baltistan region dosen't need Passport or Visa for traveling to China. All this shows that journalists and other organizations are travelling freely in AK Pakistan and there isn't any sort of riots or oppressed people not like Jammu held under indian rule.

 

[Hafizzz]

The Dalai Lama handed Tawang to India so why can't Pakistan hand Gilgit Baltistan to China ?

 

[Renegade]

Given that the MEP Czarnecki has made statements like the following:

Ryszard Czarnecki, a member of European Parliament from Poland, said that Pakistan came into existence through restrictive voting and is being ruled by the Punjabi army. He said that the Baluchs are a distinct ethnic group and not part of Pakistan.

He said that the Pakistani army is pursuing a policy of Baluch genocide as described in the reports of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan. The Pakistani army should stop this operation and stop building military cantonments in Baluchistan for the purpose of subjugating Baluch people. He said that Baluch nationalists were fiercely opposed to the national assembly.

He said that currently gross violations of human rights are taking place in Baluchistan under the hands of Pakistan military. He gave an example of army attack on Dera Bugti where 85% killed were women and children. He said the international community condemn these human rights violations and demand from Pakistan to stop these immediately.
Foreign Policy Centre: Articles / Baluchistan at the Crossroads

It is no surprise that Pakistan refused a visa to an individual with an obvious bias and agenda against Pakistan. Certainly individuals with a clean track record and a desire for objective reporting instead of spouting propaganda to advance an agenda against the Pakistani State would be welcome and are welcome, as pointed out by TK.

Ok lets says for instance that Mr.Carzenic is biased. Even to me his description of the situation in Balochistan as Genocide seems a little far fetched. Having said that i must also add that Balochistan is a disturbed area and a section of its people have a problem with Pakistan.

Nevertheless, this does not explain why the the GoP blocks access to Foreign Journalists to visit Gilgit-Baltistan. As the NYT article alleges.Refer to post-47, for a more comprehensive understanding of what i am trying to say.

 

[Renegade]

I'm not going to bother besides saying that you obsession with outside support is a largely a result of an experience with India's insurgency and that the vast majority of historical armed rebellions have no outside support.

Ok, lets see:

1. IRA - provided arms and training by Lybia. also people of Irish origin in the US contributed substantially to funding it and in some instances even arming it with weapons smuggled from the US.

2. Hezbollah - proxy of Iran, supported both financially and militarily by Iran. Rather successful in pushing Israel out of South Lebanon, though did get a bad beating in the 2006 Lebanon war by Israel.

3. Hamas - another proxy of Iran, successfully holding on to Gaza.

4. Viet Cong - supported and armed by the USSR. Very successful.

5. Taliban - overtook Afghanistan with Pakistni support after the Soviet withdrawal. Very successful till Musharraf did a u-turn. Emerging again with Pakistani support.

6. Kashmir - again external support.

7. Mukti Bahini - fled Bangladesh after the PA crackdown, supported and armed by India.

8. LTTE - supported by Tamils the world over. Very lethal & successful till Sri Lank finally finished them.

9. Al Quaeda - received support and sanctuary from the Taliban. Successful in tragting Americans till 9/11 finally happened and that support base disappeared.

10. South Lebanon Army - proxy of Isreal in South Lebanon, very successful till Israel was backing it.

I have listed out 10 lethal terrorist organistanions withought even giving it a second thought. These directly came to mind and all of them enjoyed good external support and majority of them have nothing to do with India.

And also Uighurs and Pakistan? you do realize that they are Turkic and central Asian and that's there support base outside of China right?

Yes Uighurs are Turkic, as the Al Quida was mainly Arabic and operated from Afghnistan, which is non Arabic. Dont you see the contradiction.

Many Uighur terrorist did get some kind of support from the terror infrastructure in Pakistan. Musharraf himself is on record saying this. He says that it was very embarrassing when a the Chinese pointed out this to him and he ordered a subsiquent crackdown on them. Guess you shoud read a bit more. Some sort of help was indeed given in the past, as for the present situation i cant say.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

[/COLOR]

Ok lets says for instance that Mr.Carzenic is biased. Even to me his description of the situation in Balochistan as Genocide seems a little far fetched. Having said that i must also add that Balochistan is a disturbed area and a section of its people have a problem with Pakistan.

It is not just his description of the situation in Baluchistan that appears biased an over the top, but his overall description of the Pakistani State.

Nevertheless, this does not explain why the the GoP blocks access to Foreign Journalists to visit Gilgit-Baltistan. As the NYT article alleges.Refer to post-47, for a more comprehensive understanding of what i am trying to say.

The NYT op-ed piece is written by a man whose historical anti-Pakistan bias and agenda has been well established in the last couple of posts by Jan and myself, and the counter POV has been provided by multiple members on this thread.

 

[GUNNER]

No Chinese troops in Gilgit, claims Pak's envoy to Beijing

BEIJING: Rejecting as "fabricated" reports of presence of up to 11,000 Chinese troops in Gilgit- Baltistan area, Pakistan's envoy here has claimed that only a "humanitarian team" from China was in the region to assist the flood victims.

"The story is not true and totally fabricated," Pakistan's ambassador to China, Masood Khan, told the state-run 'Global Times' daily.

He was referring to a New York Times report which said that about 7,000 to 11,000 Chinese troops were deployed in the strategic Gilgit-Baltistan region, where Pakistan faced a state of rebellion from the local people.

Khan said there were no Chinese troops in the area, but added that "a humanitarian team" from China was currently there to help locals who have suffered due to the devastating floods.

The NYT report attributed the military presence in the region to China's plans to gain a "grip on the strategic area to ensure unfettered road and rail access to the Gulf through Pakistan."

About the NYT story, the Global Times said "the report obviously rattled nerves in India..."

This is the first time that the Chinese media carried the NYT report after it was published on August 28. However, there is no official Chinese reaction so far.

India on Monday said that it was making "independent verification" of the NYT report about presence of Chinese troops in Gilgit-Baltistan region and added that it would be a matter of "serious concern" if it turns out to be true.

Reacting to the NYT report, Zhao Gancheng, director of South Asia Studies at the Shanghai Institute for International Studies ( SIIS), told the Global Times that the speculation in the report on Sino-Pakistan cooperation is senseless.

 

[Bull]

The Dalai Lama handed Tawang to India so why can't Pakistan hand Gilgit Baltistan to China ?

So you are saying you they did while your friends says otherwise.

You handed over NWFP to US to fight the russians, now you hand over Gilgit to China to fight the Indians. The end result would be the same, lawlessness and threat to national integrity.