Power play in South Asia is always a delicate dance and anything that happens between India and China will likely play itself out across the region, not the least in Pakistan, Beijing’s all weather friend.
And things are starting to move on the India-China front. We carried a report this weekabout India’s plan to increase troop levels and build more airstrips in the remote state of Arunachal Pradesh, a territory disputed by China. New Delhi planned to deploy two army divisions, the report quoted Arunachal governor J.J. Singh as saying.
Other reports in the Indian media said the air force was beefing up its base in Tejpur in the northeast with Su-30 fighter planes, the newest in its armoury. The HIndustan Times said it was part of a decision to move advanced assets close to the Chinese border. The IAF base in Tejpur which is in the state of Assam is within striking distance of the border with China in Arunachal Pradesh.
Arunachal evokes especially painful memories for India - for this is where the Chinese advanced deep inside, inflicting heavy casualties on poorly-equipped Indian soldiers in the 1962 war. The Chinese retreated but have refused to recognise Arunachal as part of India, and that along with other disputed stretches of their 3,000 km border has remained at the heart of more than four decades of distrust.
Indeed the renewed Indian defence deployment comes days after the air force chief said China posed a bigger and more potent threat than Pakistan.
And what of the Chinese? What do they have to say to the noises coming out of India? While official China hasn’t appeared to react publicly, the Chinese media has responded. The Global Times said in a hard-hitting editorial the Indian government’s tough new posture ”is dangerous if it is based on the anticipation China will cave in”.
China is in a different league, it says, by way of international influence, overall national power and economic scale and India’s politicians don’t seem to have realised this. On the contrary, they seem to think that they would be doing China a huge favour simply by not joining the so-called “ring around China” established by the United States and Japan, it says.
China is not going to compromise on its border dispute with India, and it was up to New Delhi to figure out why it can’t have stable relations with many of its neighbours such as Pakistan, Nepal and Sri Lanka while Beijing can, the Global Times says.
The Global Times is a popular tabloid and has been taking a strident tone on foreign policy issues. But it is published by the Communist Party mouthpiece, the People’s Daily, and can’t really be ignored.
Are we seeing the beginning of a more open, declared rivalry between the world’s two most populous countries? Where does Pakistan fit in all this? Is New Delhi going to organise its energies and defences to meet the perceived threat from China and leave Pakistan to figure out its own troubles?
And what of the Chinese? Are they going to turn up the heat on India? As this analysis notes, New Delhi is already wary of China’s role in Pakistan, and now reinforcing its fear of strategic encirclement are Beijing’s expanding ties with India’s smaller neighbours such as Sri Lanka and Nepal.
[Indian troops at the Indian-China trade route at Nathu-La; an Indian and a Chinese soldier also in Nathu-La]
.
Trackback
57 comments so far
Previous | 3 | 2 | 1 | Next
Indians are too obsessed with Pakistan to worry about China, that is why the bulk of the Indian military is deployed against Pakistan.
- Posted by Aamir AliIn fact,in the Chinese eyes,Pakistan is the brother contry because of the help from them in the Great Earthquake.
- Posted by Reminding M.JFailed State Index Rankings:
1. SOMALIA
2. ZIMBABWE
3. SUDAN
4. CHAD
5. CONGO
6. IRAQ
7. AFGHANISTAN
10. PAKISTAN
13. BURMA
17. N KOREA
19. BANGLADESH
22. SRI LANKA
25. NEPAL
57. CHINA
87. INDIA
All friends of China are topping the list. Aspiring failed state can use this as a reference. Copy this link quickly before china blocks this blog or links!
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/20 09/06/22/the_2009_failed_states_index
- Posted by tonyhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WMp-tprW yE&feature=related
- Posted by peaceSaurav Mohanty,
China may be moving for global supremacy and given the fact that US is on decline, China has brilliant chance of becoming a superpower.
But what makes you believe that India is becoming or on way to become superpower? India has a growing population which cannot be contained and therefore, poverty, corruption, ineffective judiciary etc cannot be removed. This population is not in a state to face even one season of calamity. The natural resources of India are not enough to sustain 1 billion people.
- Posted by RohitChina acts like a cat, “while drinking milk, Cat thinks that nobody could see the cat since the cat is deep down into the container. China tried to isolate India from every angle. They have no interest in Pakistan other than to keep India on the bay using Pakistan’s soil, resources. Similarly they have tried to do the same using Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh and Myanmar. The total GDP, purchasing power and per capita income of Pakistan is so low that in never came to the radar of the investors to invest in that country. The FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) in Pakistan is negligible in compare to India and China. Still China pours billions in to Pakistan. The competition for future super power is getting fierce between china and India. A war between China and India will be a lose lose situation for both India and China. As India cannot afford to have a war with Pakistan due to Nuclear, so does China. India can also wipe Sanghai and Beging from the map. Historically Communist talks tough. Though India needs to look at its approach to deal with her neighbor, it’s time for Pakistan to wake up to the ground reality.
- Posted by Saurav MohantyRohit:
Thanks for the links. Nothing much to comment on the rest.
Umair:
@Both 1965 and 71 wars cannot be termed as defensive on part of India. In both wars India tried to inflict maximum blow to Pakistan and vice versa.
—Elaborate on why not? Your own country’s ex Air Marshal Asghar Khan says that Pakistan initiated hostilities against India each time.
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn -content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/colu mnists/16-ardeshir-cowasjee-wise-words-f rom-an-old-warrior-hs-04
He says “Until recently when the so-called Taliban became a problem, our defence expenditure was meant only to meet a threat from India. The fact is that in the last 60 years of our existence, India has not started hostilities against Pakistan unless provoked to do so, or until we created conditions, as we did in 1971 in East Pakistan, for India to interfere militarily….”
@Regarding the question if India will loose a war with Pakistan at this stage? well, in my opinion its not a question of India loosing the war, its that India will not be able to win the war. if the opposite word for victory in english is defeat than so be it. India will be defeated, to rephrase it.
- Posted by rajeev-Umair, you can play with the words and become a victor on the net.
@The Kashmir insurgency is just yesterday’s event. What about the Mukti Bahni insurgents entered in East Pakistan?
-What about the raiders of 1948 to occupy Kashmir. It started from there in reality. Screwed the whole thing.
Rajeev,
One more reference
http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2006-07/chap t2007/chap25.pdf
Page number 34 TABLE 2.6
Amount due from Pakistan on account of share of pre-partition debt Rs 300 Crore.
- Posted by rohitRajeev,
1) Assuming that, do you mean India will lose the war against Pakistan, at this moment?
No one can predict future. People look forward with optimism.
2) Even solid Chinese win could not solve the border dispute–Tawang-Arunachal Pardesh. Yes they have Indian territory but could they claim all they wanted.
That’s skipping the answer. The right answer is NO.
3) “wars were defensive in nature not offensive”
Correct answer should be a thorough analysis is needed to be done as to why war victories were fruitless and not oriented towards solving problems. My answer is solution could have not been forced till US + Russia would have put it’s weight behind India. This may also solve dilemma why China pulled back.
4) Wars will worsen the cause and solve. In reality, India asking for kashmir in Pak and Pak looking for a piece of it in India is impractical. Well, some politicians in the world (US and UK; and of course Pak) thought Sikhs need independence and allowed the pro-Khalistan activities. Does India have to please them to prove her right? To hell with them(at that time). But yes K-issue needs solution.
K Issue cannot be solved by any means other than war till current position of India and Pakistan are not diluted.
5) Enlighten me since I do not know.
Please go through parliamentary papers http://parliamentofindia.nic.in/lsdeb/ls 10/ses3/1809039203.htm
“When India and Pakistan had because two independent nations India had given about Rs. 300 crores to Pakistan, But India has so far, taken no measures to recover that money from Pakistan.”
6) Wars will worsen the cause, not solve the problems. Also, what do you think will happen 5-100 yrs down the line? In addition to any pessimism…
Future, I told you, can’t be predicted… But it can be inferred from events in past. Terrorism will continue. The unabated rise of terrorism may force world to think for radical solutions.
- Posted by RohitRohit and Rajeev
- Posted by UmairGuys nice discussion, sorry to jump in. Few points here:
Both 1965 and 71 wars cannot be termed as defensive on part of India. In both wars India tried to inflict maximum blow to Pakistan and vice versa.
Regarding the question if India will loose a war with Pakistan at this stage? well, in my opinion its not a question of India loosing the war, its that India will not be able to win the war. if the opposite word for victory in english is defeat than so be it. India will be defeated, to rephrase it.
For decades after Pakistan’s creation Indian leaders, the likes of Nehru’s who suffered heart attacks due to loosing wars to China, those very Indian netas never accepted Pakistan even reluctantly. That has been the root cause of the problem. The Kashmir insurgency is just yesterday’s event. What about the Mukti Bahni insurgents entered in East Pakistan?
Rohit has a valid point, Indian system is flawed and lacks transparency. But atleast there is a permanent emocratic system, if not perfect. It is something Pakistan can learn from.
Rohit
Correction:
“Wars will worsen the cause, not solve the problems.”
“Also, what do you think will happen 5-100 yrs down the line to K-issue? In addition to any pessimism…”
- Posted by rajeevRohit:
@We can safely infer that this new gained independence in deciding matters related to defenses by defense experts would have lasted for say 5 to 6 years which also translates into victory for India in Indo Pak wars.”
-Assuming that, do you mean India will lose the war against Pakistan, at this moment?
@What has been the concrete result of victory in wars with Pakistan?
That’s a different issue. Even solid Chinese win could not solve the border dispute–Tawang-Arunachal Pardesh. Yes they have Indian territory but could they claim all they wanted.
@Was India able to reclaim territory which Congress Party makes Indians believe is part of India back from Pakistan? Did Kashmir issue got resolved even with 1971 war?
–First off all, those wars were defensive in nature not offensive. 1965–pakistan attacks India to win Kashmir territory. In 1971, refugees problems into India issue was the reason to take care of E. Pak problem. So your questions should be asked to Pakistan who did the first atack —in 1965 as well as in 1971 (1971 formal attack by pakistan if you know ???Dec 71). India has been generous (or stupid) in not pushing its way into Lahore (1965; but then that was also not India’s goal). Indira Gandhi converted ceasefire line resulting from 1971 war into LoC in J&K, but allowed Bhutto to get away with verbal acceptance that LoC will be later converted to de facto border.
@Have the Hindus of Kashmir got their rights? Does the world believe that Kashmir is part of India?
–Wars will worsen the cause and solve. In reality, India asking for kashmir in Pak and Pak looking for a piece of it in India is impractical. Well, some politicians in the world (US and UK; and of course Pak) thought Sikhs need independence and allowed the pro-Khalistan activities. Does India have to please them to prove her right? To hell with them(at that time). But yes K-issue needs solution.
@Has India got back the loan that it gave to Pakistan in late 1940’s?
–Enlighten me since I do not know.
Also, what do you think will happen 5-100 yrs down the line? In addition to any pessimism…
- Posted by rajeevRajeev,
“India had to defend its borders in later wars against Pakistan also and did OK with the same democratic system and congress party in place.”
Before we get into the nitty and gritties, after 1962 debacle, interference of bureaucracy and politicians was reduced in matters of defenses and defense was given some say. We can safely infer that this new gained independence in deciding matters related to defenses by defense experts would have lasted for say 5 to 6 years which also translates into victory for India in Indo Pak wars. Let us for some time, as you say, believe that Congress won the wars.
What has been the concrete result of victory in wars with Pakistan? Was India able to reclaim territory which Congress Party makes Indians believe is part of India back from Pakistan? Did the war in any way refrain Pakistan from using alternate means of waging war with India? Did Kashmir issue got resolved even with 1971 war? Have the Hindus of Kashmir got their rights? Does the world believe that Kashmir is part of India? Has India got back the loan that it gave to Pakistan in late 1940’s?
- Posted by RohitRohit
If not Nehru, someone has to take credit for the deafeat. whatever that is, the PM takes responsibility. It will be hard to defend Nehru. The reason for his depression and death is defeat in 1962 war.
India had to defend its borders in later wars against Pakistan also and did OK with the same democratic system and congress party in place.
@Indigenous technology…..: I completely agree.
- Posted by rajeevHow about nehry denying UN Pemanentmembership. If he accepted there would have been no war, most probably plus other advantages in today’s world. he gave imprtance to UN (Kashmir) and kicked the permanent seat.
Rajeev,
Politics somehow creeps in because of the democratic system of India. For clarification, I am anti Congress but not pro BJP. I do not vote at all.
I do not believe Nehru was responsible… Nehru was a democratic dictator who led defeat of India right from front and got away with it… Thanks to media and Congress Party.
Even I agree that strong fences result in lasting peace and India should up it’s defense to match the best in world. But there is no need to create media hype about it.
Coming down to creating strong fences etc., the contribution of indigenous companies in developing technology and weapons is not much. India has to import arms and ammo but the entire process somehow does not function smoothly and allows politicians and bureaucrats to play big time role in it. Will this help India in creating strong fences?
- Posted by RohitRohit:
- Posted by rajeevMain point is that Nehru was responsible for 1962 debacle. His geo-political foresight was more idealistic than realistic, he made bad moves, such as denying UN permanent membership and gifting UN permanent membership to the ROC China which went to PRC China in70s, gifting COCO Island to Burma, now used by Chinese, blindly believing 2 nations with disputed borders can be brothers without stregnthening defences. But that was Nehru as a person, not congress party.
I will quote Chirkut “Strong fences make good neighbors!”. So India moving some troops is perfectly normal if it helps India’s needs. Saying “If China attacks, waitress of Italy and her family will flee to Rome… Most of Congressi will also go abroad with her” is a mere speculation that cannot be proved or disapproved. Sure this tells Sonia Gandhi’s background and your anti-congress stance. Well then who will prevent any other politicians from fleeing the country—whether economist Singh, poet Atal or extremists like Advani and Modi if given chance.
Back on the useful stuff, if India accepted UN permanent membership seat in 1953 (?), would there have been 1962 war? Would it ever get?
Rajeev,
I am not saying that India should sit scared of Chinese. I am not against strengthening of India defense. I said that the article will stoke fire rather than initiate meaningful discussion. I do not claim to have superior knowledge on 1962 war but sensitive things should be stated plainly without adjectives.
“Any Indian with superficial knowledge knows India lost heavily due to Nehru’s poor insight” is as far as I believe is not the right summary. India was forced into a loss by JL Nehru may be right.
It is right to say that India China war is a remote possibility but India China need to take steps to establish a transparent and trustworthy relationship. This I believe, has been lacking ever since India and China gained independence from colonists, and one of the reasons behind the 1962 incident.
I would also like to bring everyone’s attention to [ The much publicized deployment of forces in North East and following event have curious resemblance to some events prior to 1962 ]:
Defense Minister Antony has stalled defense forces modernization deals. The reasons (allegations of bribery) given by ministry sound whimsical in nature and cannot be proved. There is no person in place who is to face legal action but deals have been stalled by defense minister. Is there no system in place till date which ensures that defense deals move in a systematic manner? What gives the politicians and bureaucracy a right to step into routine defense matters directly… If there was allegation of bribery then why Defense Minister had to step in… Is there no system in Defense Forces which investigates, concludes and then takes or suggest suitable course of action? Are civilians better equipped to state, define and decide needs of defense forces or they only need to take a pragmatic decision on needs of defense based on inputs from defense?
- Posted by rohit