Military situation in the sino-indian border

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cyclist

Junior Member
Interesting read...
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

wangchasangey.blogspot.com/2017/07/understanding-sino-bhutan-border-issues.html

Understanding Sino - Bhutan Border issues at Doklam. Search for truth
The recent Doklam event has many versions. The Indian media naturally had the versions of their Government though they shared what the Chinese also said.

More than the Indian media, it was Tenzing Lamzang of The Bhutanese who attempted to expound the Indian Government positions/ views upon the Bhutanese public through his lengthy article titled " Understanding the Doklam border issue ".

The best way to seeve the truth is to visit history of various events relating to Sino- Bhutan Border and compare with this recent inflated and manipulated Doklam incident. So now another lengthy article in response to Indian media and Tenzing Lamsang article.

1. Initially from late 1960s and through 70s, the Government of India made attempts to discuss with China on the issue of China- Bhutan international border demarcation.

2. China rejected all such attempts by India. China maintained that Bhutan which is a sovereign Kingdom should stand for herself and deal directly with China.

3. So India had to permit Bhutan to directly deal with China on the border issue. That was how the Border Talks began between Bhutan and China from the 1980s. Since then 24 rounds of Talks have taken place in most cordial manner. And much progress have been achieved. India was always kept in the loop by Bhutan.

4. It is possible that the public of Bhutan feel that the Talks are taking too long. Similar views also have been aired in the National Assembly of Bhutan . I understand the innocent frustrations. Under the past absolute Monarchy system, people are used to instant decisive decision of a King. Many do not understand the complexities involved in international boundary demarcation. The case is more perplexing since the Government is in no position to bare all the uncomfortable truths including heavy pressures from India to demand more strategic land from China.

5. Also the Indo- Bhutan international boundary in the South was demarcated so quietly. The public did not hear anything about Bhutan negotiating with India regarding her international border in the South with India. It is possible that Bhutan was in no position to negotiate. Bhutan is more vulnerable to a takeover by India than by China. Also Bhutan has no access to outside world except through India. And moreover, Bhutanese economy and commerce are totally dependant on India including travel from West Bhutan to East Bhutan in the South of the Kingdom. Against such geopolitical constrictions, Bhutan probably had to accept at where ever, the Survey of India decided to lay the Indo- Bhutan international boundary pillars. Thus the quiet smoothness and the speed when one side makes decision for two sides.

6. The fact that China is willing to negotiate with Bhutan on the international boundary of the two nations is I believe a giant step forward for Bhutanese sovereignty. I am grateful to China for this sovereign courtesy. I am even more grateful to India for all the economic assistance and freedom of trade and transit that enabled Bhutan to develop thus far. But I do love Bhutan ever more.

7. There is no doubt in my mind that Bhutan would want to finalise the Sino- Bhutan Border Talks and sign the Agreement. Bhutan has to be fully aware of the limitations of demands we can make upon China. And at the same time Bhutan is in no position to ignore the strategic interests of India. There is too much pressure. That is why Doklam the tri-junction Plateau is drawing multi attentions. It will be a blessing in disguise if China or India forcefully just takeover Doklam Plateau. The so called status quo is endangering the status of whole of Bhutan.

8. For Bhutan, Doklam holds no extra strategic significance than any other part of the Kingdom. But for both India and China, this Tri- junction is considered most vital. Unfortunately for India, the international boundary between Sikkim India and Tibet China at the Doklam Tri-Junction was decided long time back. So as vital as whole of Doklam Plateau is for Indian military strategic interest, there is not much that India can do through her State of Sikkim. The Sikkim door which India possessed is closed.

9. India, therefore, is pushing Bhutan to claim as much as possible the part of Doklam Plateau in the Sino- Bhutan Border Talks. India knows that she has the clout to use Bhutanese territory to serve her strategic interest. So what India herself had forfeited in negotiation with China, she now wants Bhutan to re-claim. This places Bhutan in a very difficult position. Every inch of Bhutanese land is sacred. To claim land for our own is justifiable. But to demand disputed land from China for Indian strategic purposes could endanger Bhutan. In demanding more, Bhutan loses the moral ground to even claim what is rightfully hers.

9. Bhutan is placed in a near impossible position. China will never surrender the strategic position that she had already gained at Doklam Plateau during negotiation on international boundary with India ( State of Sikkim ). And India is insisting upon Bhutan to wrest from China larger portion of Doklam Plateau that India could not get whilst negotiating with China on Sikkim-Tibet international boundary.

10. China wants to have better relation with the sovereign Kingdom of Bhutan. And wants to settle the border dispute in the interest of promoting closer ties including diplomatic relationship. And China has shown willingness to accommodate Bhutanese requests/ stand in other parts of the northern border. But not at the Tri-Junction where China shares border with Indian State of Sikkim and Bhutan. It seems that China had made her position clear to India in regards to Doklam status even when negotiating with India on the internal boundary of the State of Sikkim which borders Doklam along with Tibet and Bhutan. There is no way that China will give in to India through Bhutan front. The Government of Bhutan knows this and wants to be realistic and conclude the negotiations without further adieu and sign the Sino- Bhutan Border Agreement. But Bhutan does not dare to sign the Agreement without the nod from India. In the end, China will keep exercising jurisdiction over Doklam Plateau and Bhutan always at merciful generosity of India.

11. India is worried about the security of her so called chicken neck of the Siliguri corridor and thereby, the Eastern Frontier States. Maybe that was the reason of takeover of Sikkim. In the same manner, China is worried about the future security of her narrow Chumbi Valley stretch and thereby the whole of Tibet. China seems to considers Doklam Plateau as vital to her as Sikkim is to India. Even then China was willingly to share a part of Doklam Plateau with Bhutan so as to enable an amicable settlement. I feel we have to face the reality. China may not wait forever for Bhutan to get Indian clearance. Chinese security concerns would out weigh any ties including with Bhutan.

12. Presently the international boundary in eastern Bhutan has not been demarcated even with India . The sticking point is that Arunachal Pradesh is on the other side. And China claims part of Arunachal. So later, like Doklam, there is bound to be similar Tri- Juction situation. And there, too, China would not be compromising her national security for friendship with Bhutan. So considering all aspects, it may be also in India's interest to let Bhutan sign the Sino-Bhutan Border Agreement. The gesture could contribute towards reaching reasonable agreement towards drawing the Sino- India Arunachal border demarcation. Confidence building is a must in negotiation.

13. China will not budge in Sino - Bhutan Border negotiation where Bhutan is deemed to act as a proxy for Indian strategic interests. At times during Sino - Bhutan Border Talks, China may have been suspicious of India directing the negotiations from Bhutan side. And this time with India openly declaring that she had interferred on behalf of Bhutan at Doklam confirms that all along Bhutan has been actually acting as a proxy for Indian Doklam interest. This will harden Chinese resolve.
...
Click to expand...


 
C

Cyclist

Junior Member
...
14. The Bhutanese Army at Doklam would not approach the Indian Army stationed on the Sikkim side in regards to any issue with China. Bhutan is well aware that directly involving India is an act of surrendering sovereignty to another nation. It took many years and much diplomatic and political maneuvering to convince India to let Bhutan negotiate directly with China. Bhutanese leaders must demonstrate more courageous wisdom and resolve if Sino- Bhutan Border Agreement is to be successfully signed.

Response to The Bhutanese.

Tenzing Lamsang the Editor of The Bhutanese, in his lengthy article claimed that Bhutanese Army tried unsuccessfully to stop the road construction by the Chinese Party and then Indian Army got involved in stopping the construction. I really doubt that Indian Army can ever stop China from doing anything on the land that she claims as her own. Tenzing Lamsang may or may not care of the implication of what he related or claimed. But for sure he does not seem to recognise or acknowledge how much Bhutan wants to keep Sino- Bhutan Border Talks a sovereign affair of Bhutan.

Tenzing Lamsang may have been just a student studying in a Tibetan School in New Delhi when major incursion by China happened into Bhutan ( northern boundary of Haa Dzongkhag with China Tibet ). Understandably, Tibetan Schools in India would not have any good things to teach about China. They may even target Bhutan for the troubles Bhutan had with Tibetans in early 1970s. Any way whether Tenzing Lamsang was born or already a studenr, when that Chinese incursion took place, IMTRAT was very much there in Haa. And yet, Bhutan did not seek Indian Army help.

The King of Bhutan did not turn to Indian Army stationed in Haa Wangchuk LoDzong to confront the Chinese force. In fact, I believe the IMTRAT in Haa was in disarray probably packing up to leave Bhutan when the Chinese incursion happened. His Majesty commanded a Captain of Royal Bhutan Army to lead an unarmed small RBA force to march up to the extreme northern border of Haa with Tibet. A symbolic act to maintain the integrity of Bhutanese land. And this Captain accomplished the Command of his Supreme Commander. That was how a crisis was averted. Today that Captain is the Chief of Operations of Royal Bhutan Army. As a novice junior RBA Officer, he and his soldiers faced the Chinese troops and paved their way to the border. Now as a General, he can never direct his soldiers at the outpost at Doklam to seek Indian Army help. Not way. Not at all.

So Tenzing Lamsang, my views are not based on " desktop musing " as inferred by you ( my response in your fb post has been deleted by you but it's OK. I have my blog as you have your Newspaper. So I have answered your article in full here ).

I know for a fact that Bhutanese soldiers at Border out -posts take their responsibility sincerely and courageously and independent of Indian Army. It is an insult to RBA and the nation to even insinuate that Bhutanese officers and soldiers, on their own, cannot deal with Chinese forces at the border. I had, therefore, objected to Tenzing Lamsang's narration to the Bhutanese public the foreign propaganda materials that glorifies Indian Army at the expense of Royal Bhutan Army. RBA may be trained and funded by India but our Defence Force has independant Bhutanese national heart and responsibility. RBA has always fulfilled the task of securing Bhutanese Borders and cleansing the nation of any intruders including from India.

Conclusion:

Royal Bhutan Army outposts at the Sino- Bhutan border are there to carry out their defence tasks. Our officers and soldiers are not posted there to warm the chilly mountain air with their breath. They do not run to Indian Army to seek help to execute their own national defence task. Numerous Sino- Bhutan incidents have taken place in the past. And in all those incidents, the Royal Bhutan Army, the Chief of Operations or the Supreme Commander has never sought help of Indian Army to face Chinese troops at the Sino- Bhutan Border. Now if China invades Bhutan, probably His Majesty may seek Indian help. Likewise if India invades Bhutan, His Majesty may seek Chinese assistance. Maybe both will come without even inviting. Until then, Bhutan will deal with what are deemed to be containable conflicts on its own whether in the South or in the north.

For general readers. I have one point of clarification. It is true that within Bhutan, there are Indian military presences as declared by India. And yes, Bhutanese Army is trained by India and even funded by India. But all this is not for defence of Bhutan. It is for the security of India. In the defence strategy plan of India against China, India counts on Bhutan's ability to secure her international borders with China. So Indian military is in Bhutan for defence of India. And likewise Indian Army's recent action at Doklam Plateau has nothing to do with Bhutanese national interest or with Bhutanese Security Force at Doklam.

The demarche issued on 20th June by Bhutan Embassy in New Delhi to Chinese Embassy is a normal happening. Both China and Bhutan follow this diplomatic procedure to air any misgivings or clear any misunderstandings at the borders. The soldiers of China and Bhutan do not engage in unruly jostling or play kapadi kind of pushing and catching game at the Sino- Bhutan border. It must also be noted that the Bhutanese Government referred to road being built in "disputed area". Not " inside undisputed " Bhutanese territory. It said " maintain status quo" which is different from allegation of encroachment into Bhutanese Security Force manned Bhutanese territory.

The Press Release by Bhutanese Foreign Ministry on 29th June is out of norm. A kind of political " cry Wolf ". Bhutan usually acts quietly with dignity. Who was Bhutan appealing to in the Press Release with all the history ? If it was China whom we were addressing then there was no need of history as they are party to all the history. This unusual propaganda type of Press Release may have been issued at Indian request to consolidate their weak stand in the international arena. Unfortunately, in so doing, the Bhutanese Government may have further complicated a complex issue. Maybe we need to prayer harder and sincerely for the guidance of Pelden Drukpa.

May Tsawa Soum be in continuous good health. Pelden Drukpa Gyel Lo!
Click to expand...
 
Lethe

Lethe

Captain
Hendrik_2000 said:
I don't know why you said that China has been more than magnanimous in the 62 war Where is in the annals of history a conquering army returning territory to the v anguish then return to the LAC as if nothing happened. Treated the prisoner of war with respect and kindness
Click to expand...

I was not speaking of China's policy to date, only of a strain of nationalism that seems to be emerging in concert with China's growing power. To be clear, I think the two are intrinsically linked. The hubris and self-absorption of power creates its own weaknesses: most significantly the inability or disinclination to understand others, and therefore to anticipate the real-world effects of one's actions. Such myopia has long characterised the United States, as it did the European colonial powers at their height, and as China's power grows the same tendencies begin to emerge. One measure of civilizational maturity, perhaps, is the extent to which such tendencies can be mitigated by the rigorous application of empathetic intellect within a decision-making framework.
 
Last edited:
manqiangrexue

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Jura said:
I would prefer if people in China cared just how to get rich, and not about 'class struggle', 'flame of revolution' etc., but with the number of Communists approaching 100m and with Mao on all banknotes ... I sure don't know, but what if his
tidalwave
thinking is actually predominant in China
Click to expand...
If his thinking was predominant in China, then that would be evidenced by China being a giant North Korea.

People in China predominantly want to defend their national interests and watch China grow stronger, which is what China is doing now. They don't advocate China sell out national security/ interest to get rich and they don't want to go around with a "broke, life sucks, first person who looks at me wrong starts WWIII" attitude either. They are balanced, reasonable but most notably, they look forward to a future as citizens and contributors to a China that is the world's greatest superpower.
 
plawolf

plawolf

Lieutenant General
Lethe said:
As a student of history, one learns that relations between centres of power are not only about physics, but also psychology. Observing the output of various Chinese commentators, the key risk clearly emerges: that of a nation so intoxicated by its own power, by its own narrative of civilizational destiny, that it fails to perceive how its actions produce reactions that ultimately undermine its own interests.

It's possible that China could humiliate India in this latest flare-up, whether on the battlefield or in the diplomatic arena. But it would be far from sensible to do so. Looking to the long-term, the challenge posed by Indian power to Chinese interests may ultimately dwarf that of all other nations, including the United States. A superpower with a grudge, consumed by wounded pride, makes for an unwise adversary in a world that will, in any case, present China with its fair share of challenges.

Ironically, this is a variation on the same conversation one has with American hyper-nationalists who wish to see China put back in its box. It is very likely that, even today, American might could dismantle China's military inventory and supporting infrastructure from top to bottom, achieving a total (if undoubtedly costly) victory. But the question remains, as it always has: and then what? China, like India, will remain in this world and will only grow stronger over time. Kicking the can down the road another decade at the cost of nurturing a hatred that will burn across generations is, in fact, no solution at all.

So one says to American hotheads. And Chinese ones as well.
Click to expand...

Here is a perfect case study of western propaganda at work. Where you have an otherwise intelligent and thoughtful person fall into the trap of assuming China is always at fault irrespective of the actual facts.

If you looked through places like this very thread to see the actual facts of the case instead of just the highly biased cherry picked snippets reported in the western media, you will see that in this instance, India is blatantly, unquestionably and fully in the wrong for sending troops across a mutually agreed boarder (the area in question is actually the only stretch of the Sino-Indian boarder that is settled between the two countries) into a neighbouring country.

Their initial attempt to set up camp with the intention of staying is a textbook example of an attempted armed invasion and annexation of foreign territory.

China has actually shown amazing restraint in not simply machinegunning the lot of them, as pretty much every other major country would have done already in China's position (having given the intruders repeated and explicit warnings, and holding overwhelming overall military advantage over the aggressor nation).
 
manqiangrexue

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Lethe said:
Looking to the long-term, the challenge posed by Indian power to Chinese interests may ultimately dwarf that of all other nations, including the United States. A superpower with a grudge, consumed by wounded pride, makes for an unwise adversary in a world that will, in any case, present China with its fair share of challenges.
Click to expand...

I have never heard of someone describing India as a superpower before, a rising nation, yeah, but superpower? How many countries in this world do you think qualify as superpowers? Top 10? Are France and Britain superpowers too? LOL I think traditionally, it is China, Russia, USA are the only 3 who have that potential, though it may not be realized in all 3 at the same time.
 
Hendrik_2000

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
Lethe said:
I was not speaking of China's policy to date, only of a strain of nationalism that seems to be emerging in concert with China's growing power. To be clear, I think the two are intrinsically linked. The hubris and self-absorption of power creates its own weaknesses: most significantly the inability or disinclination to understand others, and therefore to anticipate the real-world effects of one's actions. Such myopia has long characterised the United States, as it did the European colonial powers at their height, and as China's power grows the same tendencies begin to emerge. One measure of civilizational maturity, perhaps, is the extent to which such tendencies can be mitigated by the rigorous application of empathetic intellect within a decision-making framework.
Click to expand...

I think you forgot that China was the Hegemon Asia for hundred of years long before the white man show up
No where during those time China interfere or enslave her neighboring country

Heck there is no occupation army or base in the vassal state
For most part China leave their vassal state alone
Study the interaction between China and RyuKyu kingdom
China does not involve in the selection of Ryu Kyu king they submitted the name and China approve providing it is legitimate heir. Chinese influence still can be seen today in Okinawa everywhere and people celebrate it in their food, festival, custom and art

You are typical of transposing Western experience to China
 
plawolf

plawolf

Lieutenant General
manqiangrexue said:
I have never heard of someone describing India as a superpower before, a rising nation, yeah, but superpower? How many countries in this world do you think qualify as superpowers? Top 10? Are France and Britain superpowers too? LOL I think traditionally, it is China, Russia, USA are the only 3 who have that potential, though it may not be realized in all 3 at the same time.
Click to expand...

You have clearly never watched Indian news.

Ironically, the behaviour Lethe so lamented about China having is actually far more appropriately applied to India, who has a totally undeserved sense of entitlement and barely contained rage at China somehow 'stealing' the wealth, power and world standing that should 'rightfully' be India's.

The western media has done its job well there to convince a billion Indians they should be the true next superpower, while China is an 'undeserving' pretender squatting on India's rightful place at the world high table.

China has been following it's non-interference policy almost religiously, whereas India is covertly or overtly meddling in the internal affairs of every single one of its neighbours, and have disputed boarders with everyone but Bhutan, who it is sock-puppeting and treating like a Provence anyways.

If there is one country in Asia drunk on its own preceived power and totally oblivious to how badly their crass behaviour is going down with everyone else, it is India and now China.
 
Lethe

Lethe

Captain
plawolf said:
Here is a perfect case study of western propaganda at work. Where you have an otherwise intelligent and thoughtful person fall into the trap of assuming China is always at fault irrespective of the actual facts.
Click to expand...

I did not say that China was at fault in this incident. However, there were clearly failures amongst those who did not anticipate India's response to China's roadworks, however justified those may have been. There were failures of intelligence, or in assessment of that intelligence. Or perhaps there were not, and the current crisis was in fact anticipated and gamed out ahead of time. In which case one can only hope that those representing decision-makers on the Indian side were very good at their job.

I was making a broad-spectrum observation about the evolution of Chinese nationalist discourse, and its potential manifestations in policy. To extend my previous post, the key word is empathy: the ability to place yourself in the shoes of another, to understand how he sees himself, why he acts the way he does, what his real priorities are, and therefore how he is likely to respond to your actions. Power tends to diminish the capacity and inclination for such empathy, but it remains necessary if one is to engage successfully with the real world, rather than -- as has so often been the case in Washington -- the dream world constructed by narrow domestic interests for narrow domestic purposes.

 
manqiangrexue

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
plawolf said:
You have clearly never watched Indian news.

Ironically, the behaviour Lethe so lamented about China having is actually far more appropriately applied to India, who has a totally undeserved sense of entitlement and barely contained rage at China somehow 'stealing' the wealth, power and world standing that should 'rightfully' be India's.

The western media has done its job well there to convince a billion Indians they should be the true next superpower, while China is an 'undeserving' pretender squatting on India's rightful place at the world high table.

China has been following it's non-interference policy almost religiously, whereas India is covertly or overtly meddling in the internal affairs of every single one of its neighbours, and have disputed boarders with everyone but Bhutan, who it is sock-puppeting and treating like a Provence anyways.

If there is one country in Asia drunk on its own preceived power and totally oblivious to how badly their crass behaviour is going down with everyone else, it is India and not China.
Click to expand...
LOL, no I have not watched Indian news. Nor do I watch North Korean news, ISIS news, or Breitbart LOL. Should I? :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top