Miscellaneous News

Phead128

Major
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
Genuine question, why did China "unilaterally withdraw/declare ceasefire" to end Sino-Indian war of 1962 and this shit still ongoing? If China "won" the Sino-Indian war, why is there still a dispute. Did China achieve all it's territorial claims during the war (ergo, why is it unresolved still)?
 

coolgod

Brigadier
Registered Member
I was just thinking, is there a chance that all those CN IND tensions from 2020 were "plans" by both CN and IND? Like a show, tho soldoers were sacrificed...?? Or maybe not?
Yes, India is actually our secret agent in QUAD, India's deal to repair US naval ships is actually to sabotage them, India's military training with the US at high altitude across the Chinese border is to actually bait the US. India's ban on Chinese apps is actually good since Indian users will focus on infiltrating western apps, India's ban Chinese foreign investment is actually protecting Chinese shareholders. India opening more Taiwan unofficial embassies is just preparation for the inevitable reunification. India funding terrorists in Pakistan to kill Chinese workers is actually an infiltration mission. /S
 
Last edited:

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
Genuine question, why did China "unilaterally withdraw/declare ceasefire" to end Sino-Indian war of 1962 and this shit still ongoing? If China "won" the Sino-Indian war, why is there still a dispute. Did China achieve all it's territorial claims during the war (ergo, why is it unresolved still)?

South Tibet was militarily indefensible since it is located in a valley on the Indian side. Supplies would've needed to go through the mountains and India had a path into the valley from their side but not China.

Askai Chin was held though.
 

TK3600

Colonel
Registered Member
The U.S. is a superpower while India is a pretend or even an aspiring one. Big mighty difference there. Not to mention that the U.S. also uses, employ, and wishes to have more Chinese scientists, businesses to leave China for the U.S. sanctions many Chinese companies. Pretty much responsible for the current economic challenges and also opportunities out of necessity for many Chinese companies including Huawei, DJI, SMIC, ZTE just to name a few. Responsible for EU enacting tariffs and blocking Chinese E.V. And to top it all, the most disgusting accusations of genocide against Chinese-Uyghurs, the destructive attempt of color revolution in Hong Kong, the still ongoing fomenting of Xizang separatists movement. Not to mention the most egregious of them all, the Taiwan separatist issue. Are we still talking about the same U.S. here?
What's India's equivalent damage to China? Palki Sharma's constant wishful thinking about her dear supapowah India and the crashing See See Pee Chinese economy? Who's their main target audience other than their own already propagandized masses. Banning Tiktok and other Chinese apps? Woop woop...What India has done against China is in my opinion more of a nuisance than an actual real tangible damage. Even the Galwan clash, the Indians got severely beaten and 20 of their soldiers lost their lives and a horde of IA prisoners, while the PLA sadly lost 4. Let's put things in perspective and we should try to be more objective with our views on geopolitics.
Counter point: Most of American damage are source of inspiration for China to improve itself. None were life threatening except 1989(but that was a one time thing). Prior to that US was sort of a helper more or less. US is the ideal rival of China. The sort that keeps country on the toe and grow, but never inflict lethal damage. Partly thanks to geographical barrier of Pacific Ocean.

What benefit has India done for China as a rival? Nothing. They are potentially life threatening because they are nuclear armed and next door. But they are not cool enough for China to self motivate. Just looking at them makes one feel complacent. It has all the negatives but none of positive.
 

GulfLander

Brigadier
Registered Member
Genuine question, why did China "unilaterally withdraw/declare ceasefire" to end Sino-Indian war of 1962 and this shit still ongoing? If China "won" the Sino-Indian war, why is there still a dispute. Did China achieve all it's territorial claims during the war (ergo, why is it unresolved still)?
I watched an indian guy in ytube b4, kinda explaining thay, usig a historical record from CN, he claims, CN withdrew from "South Tibet/ arunachal pradesh", but stayed in AksaiChin, was maybe to make an statement that maybe Aksai is ours, and we claim STibet, and u still hold it, so why not call it a day, an just bilaterally accept both situations as it is already? Camt remember whats the name of the indian guy or the name of the ancient CN general he cited.... also not sure if it is real tho...
 

GulfLander

Brigadier
Registered Member
Yes, India is actually our secret agent in QUAD, India's deal to repair US naval ships is actually to sabotage them, India military training with the US at high altitude across the Chinese border is to actually bait the US. India's ban on Chinese apps is actually good since Indian users will focus on infiltrating western apps, India's ban Chinese foreign investment is actually protecting Chinese shareholders. India opening more Taiwan unofficial embassies is just preparation for the inevitable reunification. India funding terrorists in Pakistan to kill Chinese workers is actually an infiltration mission. /S
Do you think, chances, it could be same for Marcos etc? Or not, different situation? Or maybe just too much imagination?
 

Arij Javaid

Junior Member
Registered Member
Genuine question, why did China "unilaterally withdraw/declare ceasefire" to end Sino-Indian war of 1962 and this shit still ongoing? If China "won" the Sino-Indian war, why is there still a dispute. Did China achieve all it's territorial claims during the war (ergo, why is it unresolved still)?
China also offered Pakistan to send its army to Kashmir and occupy the territory as India had no army there as it was suffering defeat at the hands of Chinese

Pakistan's military leader Ayub Khan refused, despite foreign minister urging him to attack India. Later it regretted.

Let's just say. India got lucky in 1962, both Pakistan and china could have gained a lot of territory from them.
 

Randomuser

Major
Registered Member
Counter point: Most of American damage are source of inspiration for China to improve itself. None were life threatening except 1989(but that was a one time thing). Prior to that US was sort of a helper more or less. US is the ideal rival of China. The sort that keeps country on the toe and grow, but never inflict lethal damage. Partly thanks to geographical barrier of Pacific Ocean.

What benefit has India done for China as a rival? Nothing. They are potentially life threatening because they are nuclear armed and next door. But they are not cool enough for China to self motivate. Just looking at them makes one feel complacent. It has all the negatives but none of positive.
China has learnt a lot from America. That's a fact and it's not a shame since it means you swallow your pride and get better.

Not really much to learn from India as an entire country especially when talking about modern age. Xuanzang already went to India in 600s to see the hype around buddhism which judging by his writings didn't live up to the hype. Most Buddhist places were already rotting away and at the University there, they couldn't best him in debate even though he was using a foreign language. And this was all before Islam came to deal the final blow to Buddhism in India. Sure there might be a few diamonds in India but talking from a larger scale especially governance, not really.

Oh yeah speaking of which...was there even an Indian equivalent of Xuanzang who went to a China to learn stuff?
 
Last edited:

GulfLander

Brigadier
Registered Member
"Why Mutual Trust Will Elude India, China Despite Patrolling ‘Deal’, Modi-Xi Meeting
author Pravin Sawhney

The charade of a ‘breakthrough’ is for the BJP’s domestic constituency and to make Modi’s Russia visit more palatable to his US allies.
To pave the ground for a possible meeting between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping during the BRICS summit in Kazan, the Chinese interlocutors had offered disengagement, patrolling and grazing arrangements to their Indian counterparts at the 31st meeting of the Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination held in Beijing on August 29.India bided its time to convert this offer into a ‘supposed breakthrough’ to justify Modi’s meeting with Xi on October 23.This is the reason why foreign minister S. Jaishankar’s announcement was not matched by a similar statement by his Chinese counterpart. From their perspective, there was nothing to announce. They offered India an opening to reignite the relationship that had been in cold storage since the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) made multiple deep incursions into east Ladakh in April 2020.
According to a high-level source, the Chinese offer was to be implemented in two phases. In phase one, both sides could patrol and send cattle for grazing two kilometres inside each other’s territory from the present positions in Depsang and Demchok (the two remaining friction points in east Ladakh) by informing the other about their patrolling plans – the number of troops, time and duration of the patrol.This, the Chinese side said, would help ‘avoid misunderstanding’ on the limits of patrolling allowed to each side.In phase two, both sides would start the disengagement of forces and create a four km-buffer zone where both could conduct regular patrolling without informing the other side.
Once disengagement was done, the two sides could start work on new confidence-building measures for the management of ‘border areas’ since the Line of Actual Control would be replaced by buffer zones. This was agreed to by both sides through the joint statement signed on September 10, 2020, by foreign ministers Jaishankar and Wang Yi in Moscow. The joint statement does not mention the de-escalation of forces.
There will, therefore, be no de-escalation of forces, implying the PLA vacate (according to media reports) the over 2,000 square kilometres of territory that it came to occupy in April 2020. In any case, it has no reason to do this after Modi himself told the nation on June 19, 2020, that nobody had entered or occupied Indian territory.
The PLA’s occupation of Indian territory by moving to its claim line of November 1959 was in response to India creating new maps of the Union territory of Ladakh showing Aksai Chin as its part. The Chinese had told Jaishankar this on August 11, 2019, when he visited Beijing, that India’s cartographic aggression was unacceptable to them.
China’s offer accepted by India in toto is evidence that China is keen to normalise relations with India. By showing the Chinese offer as its initiative accepted by Beijing, the Modi government has sought to tell its support base that it has bested China after the disaster of June 2020 Galwan incident.
But on this vast wasteland of different requirements, trust cannot be built. The reasons for this are simple.
China and Russia want India to strengthen BRICS, which will help bring stability to the global geopolitics where there is a once-in-a-century contest between two entirely different models of global governance.
If India as a Global South nation was to wholeheartedly support the Chinese and Russian-initiated model which promises development and prosperity to Global South nations based on equality and win-win outcomes, two things would happen
One, the US-led governance model followed by Global North nations and based on hierarchy and balance of power politics and which believes in zero-sum game outcomes would weaken. And two, the US plan to build India as a military bulwark against China in the Indian Ocean region would come a cropper.
India, of course, with its so-called multi-aligned foreign policy believes it can manage to be in both governance models. This helps project the image of the prime minister as a world leader sought by all major and medium powers in the world to the domestic audience.
Specific to the 16th BRICS summit, Modi could not have refused Putin’s invitation to Kazan since Russia is India’s time-tested partner. Not meeting Xi in Russia would have embarrassed the host, who in the past had played peacemaker between India and China. Given this, Modi had no option but to meet Xi.
Yet, the government had to demonstrate to both its constituency in India and to the US that there was a compelling motivation for this meeting. Hence, the charade of a breakthrough.
With this run of duplicity, which wouldn’t have escaped China, it is unlikely that much would emerge from the bilateral between Modi and Xi. Both sides are treading parallel paths with no meeting point."

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Top