Why dont India play China's own game. Give missiles and sophisticated arms to taiwan.

[Guynextdoor]

Are those naunces bigger than 62's war?

Anyways, it is actually quite simple to prove. Just find the transcript of the meeting between Singh and Wen on news paper or TV. As I said before both words of "India will respect China's claim or Taiwan" and "China will support India's bidding for UNSC" might have been exchanged in the meeting, but that is just memorandum of understanding between the two governments. It is definitely not a trade agreement. I am sure that Singh will never say something like "In order for India to respect China's claim on Taiwan, China has to support India's bidding for UNSC" or vice versa. If he indeed choose not to respect China's claim on Taiwan, then it can only mean that India is ready to break off all its diplomatic ties with China. That seems too much bigger a trade for UNSC bidding, isn't it? It is just somehow the journalist of that article who doesn't know squat about diplomacy somehow twisted story, and made it sounded like a trade between the two governments. That is why it is unprofessional on so many levels by anyone's standard.

I don't know the context behind your bringing it in but the 1962 war was a joke of a war in which a somewhat strong china defeated a weak India. There are many things bigger than some border fight and if you think that's a benchmark for anything, you are wrong.

What I know is this. If TOI, the most influential publication in the subcontinent brings out the story that there was a 'trade off', I would naturally assume that there is no smoke without fire. The never claimed that they looked up the MOUs and came out with it. My experience with them...they've got all sorts of ppl in the foreign affairs misitry to give them the news.
PS- If you are making an assumption that India is very conerned about China's military prowess & therefore will give in to glorious 'one china' policy , let me remind you that this aint 1962 and your army isn't all that great just doesn't have in it the ability to take on a 1.2 m standing force. You wanna follow one china or two china policy, that's ur business, if you sit across the negotiating table, you better have a strong reason why it appeals to India's national interest.

 

[chauism]

I don't know the context behind your bringing it in but the 1962 war was a joke of a war in which a somewhat strong china defeated a weak India. There are many things bigger than some border fight and if you think that's a benchmark for anything, you are wrong.

The reason I brought out 1962's war was because what could be a worse nuance than a war between China and India. Even then, India still stood with the "One China Policy", and voted yes for PRC to replace ROC in the UN in 1972.

What I know is this. If TOI, the most influential publication in the subcontinent brings out the story that there was a 'trade off', I would naturally assume that there is no smoke without fire. The never claimed that they looked up the MOUs and came out with it. My experience with them...they've got all sorts of ppl in the foreign affairs misitry to give them the news.
PS- If you are making an assumption that India is very conerned about China's military prowess & therefore will give in to glorious 'one china' policy , let me remind you that this aint 1962 and your army isn't all that great just doesn't have in it the ability to take on a 1.2 m standing force. You wanna follow one china or two china policy, that's ur business, if you sit across the negotiating table, you better have a strong reason why it appeals to India's national interest.

After 1972's Nixon's visit to China, it took 7 years and 3 administrations for US and China formally established diplomatic ties in 1979. The reason was because the "One China" policy. China would not give up anything for it until US gave in on this. This "One China" policy of both sides is not only a domestic policy, it is also both PRC and ROC's core principle of its diplomacy and foreign relationship. It is a policy of "Us or them", there is nothing in between. So in the end there is only one possibility that India can recognize Taiwan, it is to give up its recognition of PRC as the legitimate government of China, and break off all its diplomatic relationship with PRC as it is also required by ROC's constitution. So I can hardly see there is any possibility of a "trade" for this principle. The only time this will be on the negotiation table is when PRC or ROC in this matter is negotiating with a country about establishing a diplomatic relationship with either of them, but can not be both.

That has been said, I never implied that China will use its military prowess to force anyone to follow this "One China" policy. It doesn't have to, because the policy has been practiced by both side. US has much powerful military force than China in 1979, but it still have to respect "One China" policy when it wanted to establish a relationship with PRC. There are 22 countries in the world that recognize ROC as the legitimate government of China, and one thing they are all in common is that they can not have any diplomatic relationship with PRC. The national interest for India is very simple, it is better to have a proper diplomatic relationship with PRC than to have it with ROC. There are so many things China and India need to be working on with each other despite there was some up and downs in the past.

Again I don't know how the journalist from TOI got this idea that this can be traded for something as trivia as supporting India's bidding for UN.