If F. William Engdahl is right then China won by avoiding the outbreak of war. And if China was aware of such an Indian plan it might have decided to provide India with an opportunity to act near Bhutan and nowhere else to reduce the war if it were to break out despite all precautions and to enable it to influence Bhutan, receive a Bhutan ambassador, after the failure of the Indian scheme.
India incursion and Chinese standoff at Dolam, Bhutan
- Thread starter Hendrik_2000
- Start date
- Status
Jura, India cannot claim victory here even if Chinese road construction is halted indefinitely. The matter of the fact is India unilaterally withdrew first without any Chinese commitment to stop road building. Just because there is no current Chinese road construction does not mean that there will not be one in October or early next year. If these reports are true that the Chinese have issued a temporary hiatus with regards to construction, I presume it is for the Xiamen BRIC summit, where Xi does not want to embarrass Modi even further. But as always, the Indian media will try there best to twist this story into the best propaganda outcome for them.well the road has been an issue for the Indians, and they basically did all they could to prevent China from building it; what matters is if they succeeded or not, I guess
(note I of course don't know if China will, or won't, resume Doklam road-building, that's why I come here, because a vid showing such activity would be posted very quickly with
#481 ougoah, Today at 9:47 AM
type of comments
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
China and India finally working as a team... for the goal of not embarrassing India LOL
I really think China went too easy on them, but it's because the fellas in ZhongNanHai recognize that going hard on India would be falling into USA's trap by focusing on beating down a pawn while the other king watches you expend energy and learns how you fight.
I really think China went too easy on them, but it's because the fellas in ZhongNanHai recognize that going hard on India would be falling into USA's trap by focusing on beating down a pawn while the other king watches you expend energy and learns how you fight.
Jura, China can't claim victory here even if Indian troops had retreated for the time being.
It's usual saving face on both sides with two nations coming up to the agreement of getting back to status quo. It could be used as a story of success on either side (and it is) but in fact nothing had happened there. And it will come back in the future I assume. PRC can be a bit unsatisfied with poking India and getting an immediate response contrary to what they expected when they started I assume.
Russians did their work after all pretty efficiently here.
Equation
Lieutenant General
India's face got more to lose than China.
You're pretty stubborn Janiz, I'll give you that. The losing belligerent is the one defined as leaving the battlefield first without any mutual agreement. India clearly fits this definition and hence is the de facto loser. They crumbled under intensive Chinese military and diplomatic pressure, just as I had expected. And FYI, there was no "two nations coming up to the agreement of getting back to status quo"; am I missing something here or is this simply made up? In fact, the Chinese have stated that they were going to move troops and step up patrols in the now unoccupied Doklam area, while the road is being assessed for weather conditions (it's almost winter). Regarding your last sentence, I'm very confused. What does Russia have to do with all of this? Do you think that Russia has the leverage to force China into submission when its economy completely depends on the latter?
The Chinese leadership realized India was going to crack under Chinese pressure. A preemptive attack would've been a completely justifiable casus belli and India knows that it's not in a position to challenge the PLA. Had the Indians not withdrawn, China would've most likely used force. Obviously, India is still licking the wounds of 1962.
Technically, it was an engagement because both party's respective militaries were involved and they got into a scuffle at Pangong lake (remember that Chinese soldier kicking the Indian in the back?).
Winning or losing will be reflected in Bhutan's position after the standoff. At least this is the only meaningful win/lose measurement. If China pulls Bhutan away from India as they did with Nepal, building the road or not is not that important any more. I also think this is India's true motive, not what they claimed.
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
I raised this question before and I'll ask again. What is Bhutan good for? What does it have to offer China? Weigh that against how much money it wants every year in support. Calculate how much military equipment that money could afford. (I threw a figure out there, $10 billion can buy ~100 J-20.) In the end, is it to China's benefit to have Bhutan as an ally on China's bankroll? Or is it just a big, expensive F U gesture to India?
Jura The idiot
General
India has made sure that Bhutan has a colossal debt to it. So talking about $10b is already making it difficult to use that debt to keep Bhutan from establishing diplomatic relations with China, the way it has been used these many years. Then there are the costs of building some roads and a railway into Bhutan.
- Status