Sino-India conflict

In 2003, India said it recognized the Tibet region as an autonomous part of China and Beijing recognized Sikkim as part of India

Click to expand...

Recognizing as an autonous part is not the same as an integral part.

That does not mean India has given up its claim on Aksai Chin, which independent Tibet gave to India. The news reports provided by you itself say that India still has claims on Aksai Chin that independent Tibet handed to India.

Even Kashmir is an autonomous region of India, yet India and Pakistan treat it as a dispute. India only provides for defence and communication, whereas Kashmir makes its own laws [even the President cannot interfere in their affairs].

Please note that the Government of Free Tibet in exile is in India. Their headquarters are in north India, and they run their government from their. The Dalai Lama is also a part of it, and Indian Government treats him as an official guest.

vincelee said:

"Hence to say that the Indian army is incompetent or "cowardly" would be, naive."

Really Indian "fighter"? I think you should look into the POW counts.

Click to expand...

IMO, a POW is not the product on military incompetence, its more of political cowardice.

Well, more like factor of common sense....

Anyway Vince, Indianfigther, try to avoid going to an depate over this

Indianfighter said:

Recognizing as an autonous part is not the same as an integral part.

That does not mean India has given up its claim on Aksai Chin, which independent Tibet gave to India. The news reports provided by you itself say that India still has claims on Aksai Chin that independent Tibet handed to India.

Even Kashmir is an autonomous region of India, yet India and Pakistan treat it as a dispute. India only provides for defence and communication, whereas Kashmir makes its own laws [even the President cannot interfere in their affairs].

Please note that the Government of Free Tibet in exile is in India. Their headquarters are in north India, and they run their government from their. The Dalai Lama is also a part of it, and Indian Government treats him as an official guest.

Click to expand...

IndianFighter so how about the rest of China's autonomous provinces ?

An autonomous (subnational) entity is a subnational entity that has a certain amount of autonomy. Typically an autonomous entity contains a national minority which is different from the national majority, or is geographically distinct.

Click to expand...

India has recognised Tibet AS A PART of China according to China's own
designation.

According to your definition Beunos Aires isn't part of Argentina

Can we agree on this point India attempted to gain disputed territory through a 'forward policy' due to poor planning ?

FreeAsia2000 said:

IndianFighter so how about the rest of China's autonomous provinces ?

Click to expand...

India does not have territorial claims on those provinces.

India has recognised Tibet AS A PART of China according to China's own designation.

Click to expand...

according to China's own designation, not India's.
According to India's designation, it is an autonomous region of China not an integral part of China.

According to your definition Beunos Aires isn't part of Argentina

Click to expand...

That was not implied by what I said. I said that that doesnt mean India has given up its claim on Aksai Chin that was ceded by independent Tibet to India.

Can we agree on this point India attempted to gain disputed territory through a 'forward policy' due to poor planning ?

Click to expand...

India never recognized Tibet as an autonomous region of China until 2003. The question of poor politics doesnt arise. Until 2003, India recognized Tibet as an independent nation under Chinese occupation.

I repeat : India still claims Aksai Chin from Tibet. Since Tibet is under the occupation of China (not integral, but autonomous), India claims Aksai Chin from China.

Indianfighter said:

India does not have territorial claims on those provinces.


according to China's own designation, not India's.
According to India's designation, it is an autonomous region of China not an integral part of China.


That was not implied by what I said. I said that that doesnt mean India has given up its claim on Aksai Chin that was ceded by independent Tibet to India.


India never recognized Tibet as an autonomous region of China until 2003. The question of poor politics doesnt arise. Until 2003, India recognized Tibet as an independent nation under Chinese occupation.

I repeat : India still claims Aksai Chin from Tibet. Since Tibet is under the occupation of China (not integral, but autonomous), India claims Aksai Chin from China.

Click to expand...

IndianFighter the definition of an autonomous region has already been given to you. It means a region of a country that has some freedom regarding arranging it's own internal affairs IT IN NO WAY implies that the region is not a part of the country. Thus Beunos Aires is an integral part of Argentina but is designated as an autonomous region.

My posts have been censored here. Did I break a rule?

___________

I apologise. I am not very used to forums. Nothing has been edited. It was in another place where I replied.

Just for you know, If you had been moderated, we always try to leave good markings of it (the red text) and explain why it is done.

thanks,

I am learning to use forum... Lol.

FreeAsia2000 said:

It means a region of a country that has some freedom regarding arranging it's own internal affairs IT IN NO WAY implies that the region is not a part of the country.

Click to expand...

It also in no way implies that the region cannot be sovereign again.

Example of Kashmir. Till the time it is resolved, it remains under autonomy within India (I am talking of Indian Kashmir).

Similarly, till the time Tibet is resolved, it remains under autonomy of China (China provides administration/defence, currency etc.).

Now autonomy of Buenos Aires is different. It just means that it doesnt come under a province/state and has its own municipality and other federal administration.
It is more like the Union Territories of India like Andaman Islands and Lakshadweep Islands of India or Falkland Islands of UK. Thats not "pure" autonomy.

Hence Buenos Aires is a Union Territory of Argentina and not an autonomous region.

Some Indian cities are also union territories like Chandigarh, and Pondicherry (which are inside Indian mainland).