Ladakh Flash Point
- Thread starter Mt1701d
- Start date
- Status
The Chinese state is, at best, a bunch of utilitarians, and at worst, a bunch of amoral monsters.
You shouldn't forget what China did to Vietnam in the decade after 1979. The Chinese described themselves as being like the Japanese, i.e, war atrocities started because the Chinese couldn't deal with guerrilla resistance and couldn't give the Vietnamese a sufficiently bad beating. So they resorted to destroying Vietnamese infrastructure and destroying Vietnamese hideouts, which were probably filled with non-combatants besides guerrillas.
Kashmir is basically India's Tibet. Of China's current territory, three regions are colonial. The first is Yunnan, which was annexed in the Ming dynasty after the Ming decided to annex the Dali Kingdom. The territory has many minority peoples, but is majority Han. Xinjiang is another one, given that the Uighurs were invited to their present holdings after the Dzunghar Genocide, but the Chinese had holdings in the region for thousands of years. The last would be Tibet, which was a Qing Suzerainty. Here, the PRC exerted direct control for the first time after Liberation, going from a Qing official officially an overseer to direct control of the territory. Obviously, you had unrest, guerrillas, etc.
Kashmir, likewise, was a Muslim-majority region that would most likely prefer to be part of Pakistan, if it weren't for its Hindu ruler who eventually accepted annexation by India. It's been historically restive and a hotbed of militants / terrorists, and Modi went ahead and attempted to increase the level of subjugation of the territory, alongside importing Hindus to change the religious composition of the territory.
China basically has no obligation to bail-out the Kashmiris. The Chinese don't do moral intervention; their hit on Vietnam was to bail out the Khmer Rouge of all people and the Chinese failed to deal enough damage to end the Vietnamese occupation.
You shouldn't forget what China did to Vietnam in the decade after 1979. The Chinese described themselves as being like the Japanese, i.e, war atrocities started because the Chinese couldn't deal with guerrilla resistance and couldn't give the Vietnamese a sufficiently bad beating. So they resorted to destroying Vietnamese infrastructure and destroying Vietnamese hideouts, which were probably filled with non-combatants besides guerrillas.
Kashmir is basically India's Tibet. Of China's current territory, three regions are colonial. The first is Yunnan, which was annexed in the Ming dynasty after the Ming decided to annex the Dali Kingdom. The territory has many minority peoples, but is majority Han. Xinjiang is another one, given that the Uighurs were invited to their present holdings after the Dzunghar Genocide, but the Chinese had holdings in the region for thousands of years. The last would be Tibet, which was a Qing Suzerainty. Here, the PRC exerted direct control for the first time after Liberation, going from a Qing official officially an overseer to direct control of the territory. Obviously, you had unrest, guerrillas, etc.
Kashmir, likewise, was a Muslim-majority region that would most likely prefer to be part of Pakistan, if it weren't for its Hindu ruler who eventually accepted annexation by India. It's been historically restive and a hotbed of militants / terrorists, and Modi went ahead and attempted to increase the level of subjugation of the territory, alongside importing Hindus to change the religious composition of the territory.
China basically has no obligation to bail-out the Kashmiris. The Chinese don't do moral intervention; their hit on Vietnam was to bail out the Khmer Rouge of all people and the Chinese failed to deal enough damage to end the Vietnamese occupation.
Every Indian smartphone made from $1 to $500 has been partially if not totally Chinese. Indian only in name and in business location. Everything is supplied and often assembled in China by Chinese. Some Chinese investments into India making electronics have Chinese products made in India by Indians. Hopefully these investments get banned by Modi in yet another gloriously ironic stealthy own goal. Actually not stealthy but most Indians are mouth foaming nationalists and way too emotional to notice the real world.
The Chinese don't do moral intervention. No one does unless their interests are being hurt. The Chinese are better because they don't pretend to do moral intervention and don't argue for their case using the facade of convenient false morality. Which has prohibited and discouraged Chinese from doing the same level of harm and ill to the world than the proper colonialists and imperialists.
China's history has been bloody indeed and much infighting and expansion under Mongol kingdoms did occur but occurred so far in the past and has now been so thoroughly established even a Taiwanese ruled mainland Nationalist government would hold onto Tibet and Xinjiang... Yunnan? lol the Nationalists would even wage war on Mongolia to "reclaim" all of it, along with half of Vietnam and much of Siberia surrendered to the Russians in the 19th and 20th centuries. Those were all historically accepted as Chinese lands at some point or another in history and with Siberia, it's lost to Russia from war during China's lowest century. The CCP claims none of these and won't. They don't need to and realised what's worth fighting for and what's worth settling. SCS and Taiwan are worth fighting for. Diaoyu and Indian borders are not so much but still bring into question national sovereignty. So they remain important but not absolute priorities.
Most national borders these days are set except for Australia carving out a country for itself in PNG called East Timor, and India annexing Sikkim and Gao and slowly encroaching on multiple neighbours that even Nepal is fed up with the Indians recently. Big powers know land border changes is too 20th century to apply nowadays. It's all about soft power, wealth, political influence, and the military muscle to back those qualities rather than to implement long term border changes and holding those down through time is expensive. So the USA applies information and psychological warfare on the world. Against China, it's less effective except in HK so it wages economic and technological warfare. Military warfare between the two is not happening until one is very obviously stronger than the other and this hasn't been the case since China's mastered the ICBM+SLBM+H bomb combo back in the 1970s. China instead focuses on enriching itself because once ALL of China reaches the economic productivity of the US, it will become 10 Japans in output and STEM dominance. It just needs to do that and shelter itself from the US and its cronies until it reaches this point. This is why instead of kinetic war or even psy and info war, the US wages trade war and tech war on China to best hinder it.
Old Chinese empire conquests of those lands are no different to how any countries borders are now established. How is it any different to the British colonizing half the world and still there is no reparation or return of those lands. Falklands anyone? The USA did not include most of modern day Texas and California when the Chinese nation has already included Xinjiang, Tibet, and Yunnan for decades if not over a century. Much of India is also the exact same. There were multiple kingdoms making up modern day India. Also it used to be ruled by Muslims. What's the point of saying at one point in history this was the case. Well should we ALL return to those? I guess China should give independence to Xinjiang, Tibet, and Yunnan and screw it go all the way back to warring kingdoms borders and nations while India goes back to having Princely states and Muslim rule. The immigrants (European too and especially) should leave all non native European lands. What lunacy is this? Again one standard and rule for China and better ones for the morons.
Last edited:
Your half-baked knowledge and narrative of China's territorial history is laughable and way off topic.
This post from Inst was very half baked and quite lacking in knowledge, intelligence, and critical thinking.
I mean we can keep on going about the political disputes and the histories of the various regions. Fact of the matter is, Tibet is under Chinese control, has been at least since 1950, and the Chinese are never going to let go unless the CPC implodes, and even then, regional connectivity might allow a successor state to keep the region (and its remoteness and terrain would make it difficult for a rival, regional or otherwise, to seize it from China). Kashmir, likewise, is under Indian control and under the current force set-up, the Pakistani Army is a bleeding joke compared to the Indian one and the Chinese can't get across the Himalayas.
Meanwhile the BLM brought down the Statue of Columbus on 4th of July,happy Independence day America
So is your point that China reserves for itself the right to liberate the Kashmiris from their Indian rulers? In reality, China has a declared principle of foreign policy that it doesn't interfere in the internal affairs of others and others, implicitly, should not interfere in China's.
The entire point is that China has never pretended to conduct moral intervention on the basis of human rights. The US might claim Saddam is an asshat, and invade and have him executed for that, but the Chinese have never done so. The Chinese have never gotten involved in the Balkans mess so Kosovars can ethnically cleanse Serbs instead of the other way around.
As I've stated above, the Chinese don't have the forces to push into Kashmir, the Pakistanis don't either, so the Indians can get away with all the atrocities they want in Kashmir because no one with the ability to do so will lift a finger as they're trying to move India into an anti-Chinese alliance.
And I'll highlight, it's hypocritical for China to attempt to liberate Indian-occupied Kashmir because China uses notions of legality and suzerainty to lay claim to parts of the old Qing Empire when the parts are non-Han and have previously stated their desire for independence. The Chinese claim to Tibet is just as "founded" as the fact that parts of Kashmir are under Indian occupation because Kashmir was ruled by a Hindu Maharajah instead of a Muslim one.
Last edited:
- Status