China's strategy in Afghanistan.

2handedswordsman said:

Sorry for the interruption but i see some methodological mistakes that have to be pointed out. You talk about ancient China as something united that reflects to the modern PRC almost identical, which is absolutely wrong. Even nowdays "Xi calls for national rejuventation" which i think this is like the Stalin's diplomatic nationalist "motherland's" calling for WW2 (which motherland, the Soviet? The Rus? The Pan-slavic? The Atheist? The Christian? The Muslim? The Buddhist? The Tribal?). National rejuventation is a call to form a new national conscioussness, above and beyond the present ones. To make my point more clear, i will bring examples comparable to China qualitative and quantitive. USSR after decades of propagating and impying the union, the union broke up, several slavic nations, speaking the same or at least similar language, having common past etc became enemies, several wars between these nations occured and 30 years after the USSR's break up there are many tension hotspots in the region. The quantitive example is Europe. Both Latin and Slavic alphabet have their roots in Greek. Greek culture and philosophy set the foundations for the coming cultures etc. If we advocate that Europe is somewhat "Grecified" we can present a situation where Franks attacking the Byzantines, or Venetians is something internal, something that have to do about the damn Greeks. Which is not! Keep in mind that Min speaking territories and Jin speaking territories are as far apart (or more) as France to Italy or Turkey.

Click to expand...

USSR broke up because of external powers and and was accelerated by weak leadership. The same forces were trying to do the same to China but have all but given up.

2handedswordsman said:

When China was weak, the nomads invade and build their own dynasties. Gradually the offspring of the nomads became farmers and sinicized. Again this is not something that China actively sought, but rather voluntarily taken by the invaders.

And which China was weak? The Han? The Tang? The Qing?The Mandarin Speaking? the Jin speaking?

The same question could be put like which Greeks were weak? The Macedonians, The Romans, The Byzantines? The Greek speaking, the Latin speaking etc. IF this was not something that China actively sought, why China built the biggest ever fortification on the planet, the Great Wall?

Click to expand...

I think Chinese weakness was correlated to contact with European powers who were able to take advantage of weaknesses like no enemy China had encountered before.

As for your question about Greece - no offense but I don't think they've been anything other than weak for the past 2,000 years.

2handedswordsman said:

There is something foul to this kind of narration. This narration gives the courage to the average Greek nationalist to claim that he is the direct child of Plato and has the glorious Greek DNA. While he is just the mixture of generations of wars and cultures that passed through the region he was born. This narration makes the average Jai Hind to claim the glorious past, hoping to erase his unfortunate present. I believe that you see what i struggle to tell, no offence

Click to expand...

I don't see how that would be a nationalist position. Confucius is Chinese, Genghis Khan is Mongolian, what's the controversy in that?

You yourself claimed "Greek culture and philosophy set the foundations for the coming cultures etc". That sounds like nationalism to me.

Overall I have no idea what you are trying to claim. That China isn't a real country?

Abominable said:

I think Chinese weakness was correlated to contact with European powers who were able to take advantage of weaknesses like no enemy China had encountered before.

Click to expand...

Not really, Chinese weakness occurs when the central authority loses power (for whatever reasons), and local rulers begin jockeying among themselves for power. This can lead to anything from court intrigues to open rebellion.

Historically, periods of Chinese weakness are:

• The period between the Three Kingdoms and the establishment of Sui dynasty. This was the period where most of Northern China was ruled by non-Han nations.
• The period following the fall of the Tang dynasty and before the establishment of the Song dynasty
• The Southern Song dynasty
• The late Qing dynasty and the Republic of China

All of them can be characterized by a fragmented China.

DarkStar said:

That's why i say indians compare themselves to China as a way to flatter themselves; india is more comparable to say Ethiopia or Nigeria

Click to expand...

Don't insult Ethiopia or Nigeria please.

weig2000 said:

While the US is the biggest loser during the current Afghan withdrawal crisis, another big player, India, is also quietly nursing its wounds. India has become visibly isolated among its neighbors and the larger upcoming Eurasia geopolitical setup. It appears that India has had so much bad luck and significantly weakened ever since it allied with the US with a clear anti-China goal. Or is it just bad luck?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Modi has really dropped the ball on foreign policy. I think he's severely hampered India's hopes for her emergence as an independent power in the Indian Ocean basin and has made her a de-facto puppet of American neo-imperial hawks with nothing to show for it. I feel bad for India, to be honest. She deserves better leadership - someone with positive vision and ambition for India, not just Trump Lite. She has great potential, but right now it's being frittered away, and she's being exploited by the west, while those who claim to be "patriots" and "nationalists" cheer them on.

In Afghnistan, India's loss in undoubtedly China's and Pakistan's gain, and will undoubtedly strengthen one of the key relationships in the region. Rather than naval gazing, this really should be a wake up call to India that Modi's trumpism isn't the answer, and they need to turn the ship around before it's too late.

FireyCross said:

Modi has really dropped the ball on foreign policy. I think he's severely hampered India's hopes for her emergence as an independent power in the Indian Ocean basin and has made her a de-facto puppet of American neo-imperial hawks with nothing to show for it. I feel bad for India, to be honest. She deserves better leadership - someone with positive vision and ambition for India, not just Trump Lite. She has great potential, but right now it's being frittered away, and she's being exploited by the west, while those who claim to be "patriots" and "nationalists" cheer them on.

In Afghnistan, India's loss in undoubtedly China's and Pakistan's gain, and will undoubtedly strengthen one of the key relationships in the region. Rather than naval gazing, this really should be a wake up call to India that Modi's trumpism isn't the answer, and they need to turn the ship around before it's too late.

Click to expand...

Agreed with most of the points you made except for this one: "Rather than naval gazing, this really should be a wake up call to India that Modi's trumpism isn't the answer, and they need to turn the ship around before it's too late." That's not going to happen anytime soon, not in this decade or the next. The Jai Hinds have bought the Jai Hind narrative too much that's it's extra difficult for any sane Indian politicians to deviate from that winning formula.

2handedswordsman said:

Sorry for the interruption but i see some methodological mistakes that have to be pointed out. You talk about ancient China as something united that reflects to the modern PRC almost identical, which is absolutely wrong. Even nowdays "Xi calls for national rejuventation" which i think this is like the Stalin's diplomatic nationalist "motherland's" calling for WW2 (which motherland, the Soviet? The Rus? The Pan-slavic? The Atheist? The Christian? The Muslim? The Buddhist? The Tribal?). National rejuventation is a call to form a new national conscioussness, above and beyond the present ones. To make my point more clear, i will bring examples comparable to China qualitative and quantitive. USSR after decades of propagating and impying the union, the union broke up, several slavic nations, speaking the same or at least similar language, having common past etc became enemies, several wars between these nations occured and 30 years after the USSR's break up there are many tension hotspots in the region. The quantitive example is Europe. Both Latin and Slavic alphabet have their roots in Greek. Greek culture and philosophy set the foundations for the coming cultures etc. If we advocate that Europe is somewhat "Grecified" we can present a situation where Franks attacking the Byzantines, or Venetians is something internal, something that have to do about the damn Greeks. Which is not! Keep in mind that Min speaking territories and Jin speaking territories are as far apart (or more) as France to Italy or Turkey.

When China was weak, the nomads invade and build their own dynasties. Gradually the offspring of the nomads became farmers and sinicized. Again this is not something that China actively sought, but rather voluntarily taken by the invaders.

And which China was weak? The Han? The Tang? The Qing?The Mandarin Speaking? the Jin speaking?

The same question could be put like which Greeks were weak? The Macedonians, The Romans, The Byzantines? The Greek speaking, the Latin speaking etc. IF this was not something that China actively sought, why China built the biggest ever fortification on the planet, the Great Wall?

There is something foul to this kind of narration. This narration gives the courage to the average Greek nationalist to claim that he is the direct child of Plato and has the glorious Greek DNA. While he is just the mixture of generations of wars and cultures that passed through the region he was born. This narration makes the average Jai Hind to claim the glorious past, hoping to erase his unfortunate present. I believe that you see what i struggle to tell, no offence

Click to expand...

So you have eaten an apple (Europe), you have never eaten an orange (China), and now you are struggling to convince me that I was wrong to say that orange taste good?

ZeEa5KPul said:

Your views about your national identity and your country's history are something you should discuss elsewhere. They have nothing to do with the topic and don't belong in this thread or this forum, quite frankly.

Click to expand...

Since most of you people misunderstood what i was trying to say, lets make it clear. At first, do not let your chest thumping blind you, and read more carefully what i'm writing. I'm not bashing China nor it's history. Thank you.

EtherealSmoke said:

You do make some good points. What is really a country, or civilization? Over time, isn't it all a jumble of conquered and conquerors in a never-ending cycle all mixed together? You say it's just a narration and story, which I agree with, but at the end of the day, I think everything is really just a narrative and story if you think about it.

Click to expand...

I tried to point out the dangers of fragmenting by examining the past. And why CPC is struggling so much for the national rejuventation and the qualities that CPC gives to the exact meaning. Like common prosperity of Chinese people. I suppose if KMT had won the civil war, national rejuventation would have other qualities like capitalist exploitation of Chinese people. More worse, something like Chinese supremacism, Japanese style

Bellum_Romanum said:

Lol dude, you're grasping at straws and you're desperate in trying to make China as analogous to European non existent entity. You guys and gals were never a civilizational state so I don't know why you're going to insist and suggest that China of today is somehow a unique polity than what existed prior other than it's new political system.

Click to expand...

Not at all. I'm saying that present day's Chinese unification under CPC is a treasure that must be kept at any cost because history shows that fracturing lies in the corner if you caught off guard and step into the trap of nationalism. Western imperialists are masters at igniting these bad passions for their own interest. They don't want a strong China even more a strong Socialist China.

solarz said:

Your views about your identity and history bear no relevance to the history of China.

Click to expand...

My views reflecting my own opinion, but i had to put them on the table to prove you that i'm not trying to dictacte or having any superiority complexes. You see, we "Westerners" are not a formless mass of supremacist bastards.

Bellum_Romanum said:

I understand that your question was well meaning and that you're concept and understanding of nation-state is no longer bound to the traditional concept since I guess in your mind and perhaps that of @EtherealSmoke have move into the "4th millennium" or something. Your questions and thesis reminded me of the video I watched from "Politics and Prose" where they had Gen.Wesley Clark (ret.) as a guest to talk about his then latest book "Don't Wait for the Next War: An American Strategy." The question and answer portion a gentleman asked the retired General about his views on the nation state or how to move beyond it. I'll embed the video and you can see the question begins at 51:14 of the video.

And since this thread is about China's strategy on Afghanistan, the General also discuss the Afghanistan quandary that provided a far more nuance understanding of the region compared to his contemporaries in the military. The Afghanistan question starts from 47:30 of the video.

Click to expand...

Saying that i'm in line with an US Army general is too funny to be an insult. I was just trying to examine if there are any similarities on the evolution of civilizations. The European experience showed periods of fusion but in general is about friction, wars, fragmentation and oppression. The Chinese history seems more calm, but the same bad qualities can be observed through the ages as Solarz summed up.

Abominable said:

As for your question about Greece - no offense but I don't think they've been anything other than weak for the past 2,000 years.

Click to expand...

You missed the irony, you took it as an offense and you offended back. It's called rhetoric question, just to get us into thinking. I wasn't expecting an answer. But if you ask me, I don't think that Byzantines were too weak to sustain an empire that lasted 1100 years, till 1453. Anyway

Abominable said:

I don't see how that would be a nationalist position. Confucius is Chinese, Genghis Khan is Mongolian, what's the controversy in that?

You yourself claimed "Greek culture and philosophy set the foundations for the coming cultures etc". That sounds like nationalism to me.

Overall I have no idea what you are trying to claim. That China isn't a real country?

Click to expand...

It is a fact, just like logogram based writing of many eastern languages have it's roots in Chinese Hanzi, and algebra is a gift from the Muslim world. We can thank each other for the contribution to humanity, nothing to flex about. Claiming "glorious past" on the other hand can cast nationalist and supremacist mindsets. Here in my country we have a popular saying: "You sleep nationalist, you wake up Nazi."

Concluding, i'm trying to say that national rejuventation especially under the CPC is something precious not only for Chinese people, but also to the whole world.

End of the off topic

So we're getting all sorts of news about how terrible it is under the Taliban now.

Ok, I am no fan of the Taliban's past, but... How do they know all the details i.e. people getting hanged with helicopters or women being beaten? They don't have journalists there anymore!

It's just atrocity propaganda regardless of truth. If it's true, then it's just a coincidental guess.

2handedswordsman said:

Since most of you people misunderstood what i was trying to say, lets make it clear. At first, do not let your chest thumping blind you, and read more carefully what i'm writing. I'm not bashing China nor it's history. Thank you.

I tried to point out the dangers of fragmenting by examining the past. And why CPC is struggling so much for the national rejuventation and the qualities that CPC gives to the exact meaning. Like common prosperity of Chinese people. I suppose if KMT had won the civil war, national rejuventation would have other qualities like capitalist exploitation of Chinese people. More worse, something like Chinese supremacism, Japanese style

Not at all. I'm saying that present day's Chinese unification under CPC is a treasure that must be kept at any cost because history shows that fracturing lies in the corner if you caught off guard and step into the trap of nationalism. Western imperialists are masters at igniting these bad passions for their own interest. They don't want a strong China even more a strong Socialist China.

My views reflecting my own opinion, but i had to put them on the table to prove you that i'm not trying to dictacte or having any superiority complexes. You see, we "Westerners" are not a formless mass of supremacist bastards.

Saying that i'm in line with an US Army general is too funny to be an insult. I was just trying to examine if there are any similarities on the evolution of civilizations. The European experience showed periods of fusion but in general is about friction, wars, fragmentation and oppression. The Chinese history seems more calm, but the same bad qualities can be observed through the ages as Solarz summed up.

You missed the irony, you took it as an offense and you offended back. It's called rhetoric question, just to get us into thinking. I wasn't expecting an answer. But if you ask me, I don't think that Byzantines were too weak to sustain an empire that lasted 1100 years, till 1453. Anyway

It is a fact, just like logogram based writing of many eastern languages have it's roots in Chinese Hanzi, and algebra is a gift from the Muslim world. We can thank each other for the contribution to humanity, nothing to flex about. Claiming "glorious past" on the other hand can cast nationalist and supremacist mindsets. Here in my country we have a popular saying: "You sleep nationalist, you wake up Nazi."

Concluding, i'm trying to say that national rejuventation especially under the CPC is something precious not only for Chinese people, but also to the whole world.

End of the off topic

Click to expand...

Apologies for misunderstanding and for also misconstrueding your well intended posts. I just didn't have a clear understanding of what you were trying to convey. I appreciate your calm collected response to our assertive if not aggressive push back. Thank you.

Abominable said:

USSR broke up because of external powers and and was accelerated by weak leadership. The same forces were trying to do the same to China but have all but given up.

I think Chinese weakness was correlated to contact with European powers who were able to take advantage of weaknesses like no enemy China had encountered before.

As for your question about Greece - no offense but I don't think they've been anything other than weak for the past 2,000 years.


I don't see how that would be a nationalist position. Confucius is Chinese, Genghis Khan is Mongolian, what's the controversy in that?

You yourself claimed "Greek culture and philosophy set the foundations for the coming cultures etc". That sounds like nationalism to me.

Overall I have no idea what you are trying to claim. That China isn't a real country?

Click to expand...

An old thread on the USSR compared with China