Thread: Eurasia Topics

India’s dementia and Lankan dreams

October 31, 2020 by M. K. BHADRAKUMAR


"Third-country cooperation is highly complex, unpredictable phenomenon. Not even the closest allies can pull it off easily. Lord Curzon, the British Foreign Secretary, denied that oil interests influenced policy in Iraq, but archives show that the British government rushed troops to Mosul in 1918 to gain control of the northern oil fields in a sharp course reversal to recoup what had already been given away to France under the secret Sykes-Picot Accord of early 1916.

Even before World War II had ended, Washington began wondering about how an exhausted Britain would adjust to a world where it had less power and influence vis-a-vis the US. The US Secretary of State Edward Stettinius wrote to President Roosevelt, “Never underestimate the difficulty an Englishman faces in adjusting to a secondary role.”

Matters came to a head with the Suez Crisis of 1956 when Britain and France sent troops to seize the Suez Canal and the US was not informed of the operation. President Eisenhower hit back showing how power had shifted in the post-War world. He blocked the IMF from granting Britain emergency loans unless it called off the invasion. Britain, militarily, never acted again against the explicit wishes of Washington.

Such lessons of history should not be forgotten, as India becomes an ally of the US. The nascent signs of India’s “bloc mentality” first appeared within months of Modi government assuming power in May 2014 when it began discussing with Washington the ouster of Sri Lanka’s incumbent president Mahinda Rajapaksa by January 2015. Rajapaksa later recounted with great bitterness that a high level of US-Indian political, diplomatic and intelligence coordination in that project had done him in.

The intricate plot apparently involved splitting the Sri Lankan ruling party by cultivating pockets of influence in the Sinhala Buddhist establishment to weaken Rajapaksa’s political base and bringing in the hapless Jaffna Tamil as doormat. Rajapaksa, a tough politician himself, was completely outwitted.

The regime change in Sri Lanka was the first of its kind in South Asia and bore striking resemblance to the US’ playbook in Latin America to undermine legitimate governments by using comprador elements and put in power “our s.o.b” (as FDR once derisively called dictator Somoza.)

A great animus against China must have been incubating for long in the minds of India’s ruling elite, much before they came to power in May 2014.

Indeed, it was a radical departure in India’s foreign policy to have dragged a small neighbour to become a platform for its “Indo-Pacific” strategy with the US — a daring move, too, given Sri Lanka’s robust record of nonalignment.

The present ruling elite in Colombo will remain extremely wary of the US and India. The happenings in next-door Maldives must have rung alarm bells already that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. Plainly put, any form of entanglement with India or the US on the strategic plane will be anathema.

This is the stark message coming out of the visit by the US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to Colombo on October 28. Pompeo’s counterpart Dinesh Gunawardena said at a joint press meet, “As a Sovereign, Free, Independent nation, Sri Lanka’s foreign policy will remain neutral. Non-Aligned and Friendly.”

Gunawardena was responding to Pompeo’s overtures. Importantly, the readout of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s meeting with Pompeo says, “Elaborating on the foreign policy of Sri Lanka, President said it is based on neutrality. Relations between Sri Lanka and other nations are determined by several conditions. Historical and cultural relations, development cooperation are some of the priorities.”

“President stressed that he is not ready to compromise the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the nation in maintaining foreign relations whatever the circumstances may be. Noting that China assisted in the development of the country’s infrastructure since the end of the separatist war, President reiterated that Sri Lanka is not caught in a debt trap as a result.”

Simply put, the nadir has been reached for “Indo-Pacific” strategy in the Pearl of the Orient. What can the Samaraweeras and Wickremesinghes and Kumaranatungas of Colombo do to salvage the chestnuts on fire?

Without doubt, this constitutes a humiliating rebuff to the US-Indian fantasy that Sri Lanka could be frog-marched into the so-called Second Island Chain strategy in the Indian Ocean, alongside Maldives which has signed for a few pieces of silver in September a Status of Forces Agreement [SOFA] with the Pentagon to build American military bases there.

In 2013, India resented the US efforts to sign a SOFA with the Maldives, but in September when the American efforts fructified, Delhi became ecstatic. This must be the first instance in diplomatic history when a regional power congratulated its tiny neighbour for granting military bases to a superpower from the other side of the planet 16000 kilometres away.

The obsession with collaring the Maldives clouds Delhi’s judgment. The ruling elite blithely assume that having American military bases scattered over those 1,190 coral islands grouped in a double chain of 26 atolls, spread over roughly 90,000 square kilometers, serves India’s long-term interests.

They suffer from dementia. They have forgotten the tragic story of Diego Garcia, which used to be part of Mauritius till 1965 and was rechristened British Indian Ocean Territory by London, only to be leased out to the US [1967] to develop American bases.

There was strong opposition from littoral states of the Indian Ocean area — including India — who wished to preserve a non-militarised status in the region. However, the US simply rounded up the indigenous inhabitants, put them in overcrowded boats and dumped them on the beaches of Mauritius and Seychelles.

The UN overwhelmingly pleaded with the US to return Diego Garcia to its rightful owners but Washington, which swears by “rules-based international order”, simply thumbed the nose at it.

Do not rule out if a similar fate awaits the half million Maldivians at some point. The great game in the Indian Ocean is only beginning.

This geographical base is estimated to contain 62% of the world’s oil reserves, 35% of its gas, 40% of gold reserves, over 60% of uranium and 80% of its diamond reserves. Any doubt who will want to monopolise this fabulous wealth?

At best, Americans might send a bagful of diamonds to Surat for polishing before selling them in Midtown Manhattan’s Diamond District.

Make no mistake, the military bases in the Maldives will be a great asset for Americans to keep Indians under check. They must be anticipating already that some day an authentic nationalist ruling elite might appear in the corridors of power in Delhi elbowing out the pretenders, and revert India to independent foreign policies.

The mystique of geopolitics is such that you never know what lies in the womb of time. Just return for a moment to the fag-end of the Cold War.

Margaret Thatcher and Francois Mitterand were so deeply sceptical about the wisdom of Mikhail Gorbachev’s plan to disband the Warsaw Pact that they descended on Moscow to prevail upon the Soviet leader to go slow on the unification of Germany, while Washington on the other hand was lustily encouraging him to press ahead.

Yet, only thirty years ago, Lord Ismay had thought that NATO was formed “to keep Russians out, Americans in and Germans down.” Already by the 1980s, the calculus had phenomenally changed."

India's dementia and Lankan dreams - Indian Punchline

Originally Posted by panama hat

a country that has millions who want to emigrate . . . yet no-one wants to immigrate to.

Originally Posted by panama hat

who are you quoting

your numbers from, that support your statement?

According to the UN

World Population Prospects 2019

A handy spread sheet is available which indicates the following:

"The number of immigrants minus the number of emigrants over a period, divided by the person-years lived by the population of the receiving country over that period. It is expressed as average annual net number of migrants per 1,000 population."

https://population.un.org/wpp/Download/Files/1_Indicators%20(Standard)/EXCEL_FILES/4_Migration/WPP2019_MIGR_F01_NET_MIGRATION_RATE.xlsx


The file appears to indicate that China has had a net immigration for all the years since 1980.

Nearly 4x more desirable than NZ, 3x UK and 3x ameristan.

Thank you for your replies. Lets continue with today's game.

Originally Posted by panama hat

So, you're saying there there are not millions of Chinese who want to escape the dictatorial regime

I have posted the UN official figures. You have yet to supply any current figures/sources to validate your allegations. The UN figures undicate a net influx of people into China.

Originally Posted by panama hat

There is such a thing as being blatantly biased . . . that's you.

I post news articles regarding Eurasia, all under one heading. Some from Asian sources, some from elsewhere and some from sources I find instructive. Others here on TD post articles from sources they find. Are you suggesting all these TD members be gagged or subjected to the TD censor prior to posting?

To some my Eurasian posts may be useful, even informative or possibly mind blowing. To others such as you, they are propaganda. C'est la vie.

Originally Posted by panama hat

Our direct neighbours came over from Shanghai early last year . . . interesting chats.

You have me there my Chinese language skills are not at advanced as yours. One suspects any new immigrant would backup his reasons for moving to ingratiate themselves with their "neighbors". Of your "neighbors" how many are new immigrants and where do they hail from?

Originally Posted by panama hat

I believe people I actually speak to who are from the Mainland, whether it's my neighbours or people I meet through work in MY and SG . . .

Glad to hear you discuss world affairs with your neighbors and contacts. One hopes you are polite to them both. Or do you tailor your responses according to their position? New neighbor or business/personal wealth prospect?

Originally Posted by panama hat

and not someone like you who bases his 'facts' on Chinese Communist Party propaganda

As the topic we are discussing currently is, "International Migration", are you suggesting the UN report figures are Chinese propaganda or figures produced by appointed UN officials?

As for general topics I post, here in this thread, they are either "news" items from elected Chinese official sources, established international "news" sources or "opinion" sources I believe are competent and aware of international affairs.

You and others on the other-hand have different sources which you post. Are the posted articles true or false, propaganda or proven facts. Our opinions differ as to whether the announcements indicate provable deliveries, to a countries citizens, announced by government officials or ever changing promises uttered, revised or forgotten by political nobodies, for the benefit of the regime's financiers.

There are available facts available to all indicating which countries citizens have benefited from their governments actions. The average Joe or the already Billionaires.

Originally Posted by panama hat

is happy to have escaped the place himself

I've already described my presence in China. I had no problem with any Chinese person, company official, or regional government authority, socially or professionally. "Escaping" was just the opposite, there were a massive number opportunities awaiting to be assisted to meet national and international commitments/guidelines.

I was not happy that the last company I was employed by, that their decision during them being taken over by another company, threw away it's access/responsibility for the China market. Which I considered as the most promising market in the world. Size, number of citizens, numbers of responsible authorities but mostly unimaginable value. As you can imagine my enthusiasm waned.

Originally Posted by panama hat

and is just as happy to rubbish his chosen new domicile

Once again you lie. Put up or retract your allegation.

As the topic we are discussing currently is, "International Migration", are you suggesting the UN report figures are Chinese propaganda or figures produced by appointed UN officials?

FFS can someone ask that dick where he thinks the U.N gets their figures?

Regarding net migration INTO China. Where the hell does he get that idea. Trust me, people aren't rushing to China.
The is not greater migration into China than out.

Originally Posted by Cujo

the U.N gets their figures

"Migration: International migration based on:

(a) information on foreign-born populations from censuses and registers from major countries of destination;

(b) estimates derived as the differences between overall population growth and natural increase."

World Population Prospects - Population Division - United Nations

Originally Posted by Cujo

Where the hell does he get that idea

UN reports. If you'r suggesting the UN reports are fake, are we to accept all the UN countries figures are fake? Or just those that are, in your opinion, fake?

Originally Posted by Cujo

Trust me, people aren't rushing to China.
The is not greater migration into China than out.

Thank you for your opinion.

However you opinion is presumably based on facts. Do you have a team counting them all in and out every day, or do you have a link to support your opinion?

Originally Posted by OhOh

you opinion is presumably based on facts. Do you have a team counting them all in and out every day, or do you have a link to support your opinion?

Do you?
Who are all these people emigrating to China?

And what the hell are

As for general topics I post, here in this thread, they are either "news" items from

elected Chinese official sources,

Originally Posted by Cujo

So your source is the Chinese government. I thought so.

As I stated above;

Originally Posted by OhOh

"Migration: International migration based on:

(a) information on foreign-born populations from censuses and registers from major countries of destination;

(b) estimates derived as the differences between overall population growth and natural increase."

World Population Prospects - Population Division - United Nations

as presumably all other countries data are.

Originally Posted by panama hat

aka totalitarian regime bible

As you accuse one, you accuse all.

Originally Posted by panama hat

NZ, a UK vassal - UK Governor General

Aus, a UK vassal - UK Governor General

Sweden, an ameristan vassal - NATO

Germany, an ameristan vassall - NATO

Italy, an ameristan vassall - NATO

China - a sovereign socialist state*

Japan, an ameristan vassal - Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan

Canada,an ameristan vassall - NATO

etc etc etc

FIFY.

*
"Elections in China are based on a hierarchical electoral system, whereby local People's Congresses are directly elected, and all higher levels of People's Congresses up to the National People's Congress (NPC), the national legislature, are indirectly elected by the People's Congress of the level immediately below."

Elections in China - Wikipedia

CHAPTER I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES

"Article 1. The People's Republic of China is a socialist state under the people's democratic dictatorship led by the working class and based on the alliance of workers and peasants. The socialist system is the basic system of the People's Republic of China. Sabotage of the socialist system by any organization or individual is prohibited.


Article 2. All power in the People's Republic of China belongs to the people. The organs through which the people exercise state power are the National People's Congress and the local people's congresses at different levels. The people administer state affairs and manage economic, cultural and social affairs through various channels and in various ways in accordance with the law.


Article 3. The state organs of the People's Republic of China apply the principle of democratic centralism. The National People's Congress and the local people's congresses at different levels are instituted through democratic election. They are responsible to the people and subject to their supervision. All administrative, judicial and procuratorial organs of the state are created by the people's congresses to which they are responsible and under whose supervision they operate. The division of functions and powers between the central and local state organs is guided by the principle of giving full play to the initiative and enthusiasm of the local authorities under the unified leadership of the central authorities"

CONSTITUTION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA

All reponsibility for Chinese citizens is held by democratically elected, Chinese people.