Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 186
  1. #26
    En route
    Cujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    24-02-2024 @ 04:47 PM
    Location
    Reality.
    Posts
    32,939
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    A BBC report, some opinions from our resident experts.


    It depends if you actually look for competant sources.

    Compare and contrast BBC with two Chinese reports.

    India urged to halt border violation

    By Zhou Jin | China Daily | Updated: 2020-06-17 07:05

    "China urged India on Tuesday to stop all infringements and provocative actions and work with China to return to the correct track of dialogue and talks to resolve disputes.

    Senior Colonel Zhang Shuili, spokesman for the Western Theater Command of the People's Liberation Army, said that there was a serious violation of commitment when Indian troops on Monday night crossed the line of control at the Galwan Valley region at the border area of China and India and engaged in provocative attacks, which resulted in "fierce physical confrontations and casualties".

    Indian border troops seriously violated accords between the two countries and the consensus reached at talks between high-ranking officers at the group army commander level of both sides, Zhang said in a statement on Tuesday evening.

    He stressed that the region has always been Chinese territory and that India's actions seriously harm bilateral military relations.

    "We demand that the Indian side strictly restrain its front-line troops, immediately stop all infringements and provocative actions, and work together with China to return to the correct track of dialogue and talks to resolve differences," he said.

    China and India have been locked in a standoff in the border areas for weeks, and the two countries have tried to maintain communication via diplomatic and military channels to ease the tension.

    Chinese and Indian military officials held commander-level talks earlier this month at the border personnel meeting point at Moldo to discuss ways to resolve matters related to the recent border situation and safeguard peace and stability in the border area."

    India urged to halt border violation - World - Chinadaily.com.cn

    India needs to rid two misjudgments on border situation: Global Times editorial


    Source:Global Times Published: 2020/6/17 0:03:40

    Chinese and Indian troops were engaged in a serious physical clash in Galwan Valley on Monday. The Indian side said three Indian soldiers were killed. The Chinese military confirmed that clashes between the two sides have led to casualties, but did not release the exact figures.

    This has been the most serious clash between Chinese and Indian soldiers so far. Indian media reported this is the first time since 1975 that soldiers died in border conflicts between the two countries.

    India has been building extensive infrastructure facilities along the border, and forcibly built part of the facilities in the Chinese side of the Line of Actual Control regardless of bilateral divergences over the border disputes. The two sides went into repeated physical clashes as Chinese soldiers tried to stop their Indian counterparts.

    The arrogance and recklessness of the Indian side is the main reason for the consistent tensions along China-India borders. In recent years, New Delhi has adopted a tough stance on border issues, which is mainly resulted from two misjudgments. It believes that China does not want to sour ties with India because of increasing strategic pressure from the US, therefore China lacks the will to hit back provocations from the Indian side. In addition, some Indian people mistakenly believe their country's military is more powerful than China's. These misperceptions affect the rationality of Indian opinion and add pressure to India's China policy.

    The US has wooed India with its Indo-Pacific Strategy, which adds to the abovementioned misjudgment of some Indian elite. In 2017 when Indian troops crossed the line and entered the Doklam area to openly challenge China's territorial sovereignty, their craze was caused by such arrogance. Such an aggressive posture has won praise from the Indian public, which means that the Indian elite's mentality toward China is unhealthy and dangerous.

    China does not want to clash with India and hopes to peacefully deal with bilateral border disputes. This is China's goodwill, not weakness. How could China sacrifice its sovereignty in exchange for peace and bow to threats from New Delhi?

    China and India are big countries. Peace and stability along border areas matter to both countries as well as to the region. New Delhi must be clear that the resources that the US would invest in China-India relations are limited. What the US would do is just extend a lever to India, which Washington can exploit to worsen India's ties with China, and make India dedicate itself to serving Washington's interests.

    The gap between China's and India's strength is clear. China does not want to turn border issues with India into a confrontation. This is goodwill and restraint from China. But China is confident in the situation at the border. It does not and will not create conflicts, but it fears no conflicts either. This policy is supported by both morality and strength. We will not trade our bottom line with anyone.

    The clash in the Galwan Valley this time has led to casualties on both sides, indicating China-India border tensions, amid constant frictions, may spiral out of control. We notice that the leadership of the two militaries has exercised restraint after the incident, indicating that both sides would like to handle the conflict peacefully and not let the conflict escalate. It is noteworthy that the Chinese side did not disclose the number of casualties of the Chinese military, a move that aims to avoid comparing and preventing confrontational sentiments from escalating.

    We would like to see tensions in the Galwan Valley subside. It is hoped that the Indian side can strengthen management of frontline troops and engineers, and adhere to the consensus reached between the leadership of the two militaries. It will benefit both sides if the situation cools down, and it needs the efforts of both Chinese and Indian frontline troops.

    On the China-India border issue, the Chinese public should trust the government and the People's Liberation Army. They will firmly safeguard China's territorial integrity and maintain national interests when dealing with border conflicts. China has the ability and wisdom to safeguard every inch of its land and will not let any strategic trick meet its end.

    India needs to rid two misjudgments on border situation: Global Times editorial - Global Times

    Jaw, Jaw or war war. it seems our TD experts above desire more dead soldiers.

    China suggests talking will bring a solution acceptable to both sides. If of course both sides are in control and not assisting another's plans.
    Chinadaily? fuckoff with that shit will you. Chinaliesandpropoganda you mean.
    They annexed 60 sq km of territory while the Indians had stopped patrols because of covid.

  2. #27
    Thailand Expat
    Shutree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Last Online
    16-03-2024 @ 11:28 AM
    Location
    One heartbeat away from eternity
    Posts
    4,642
    Quote Originally Posted by Latindancer View Post
    ABC News in Oz just aid that they used fists, rocks and metal bars. And that despite the Chinese denials, Chinese forces were originally grouping above the Indian forces.
    That is brutal. To beat a person into incapacity is already primeval. To go on to kill them is not exactly the warriors' code.
    What next, I wonder?

  3. #28
    En route
    Cujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    24-02-2024 @ 04:47 PM
    Location
    Reality.
    Posts
    32,939
    The hand-to-hand combat lasted hours, on steep, jagged terrain, with iron bars, rocks and fists. Neither side carried guns. Most of the soldiers killed in the worst fighting between India and China in 60 years lost their footing or were knocked from the narrow Himalayan ridge, plunging to their deaths.

    India has reacted with shock and caution to the loss of at least 20 soldiers on its disputed border with China, with images of the Chinese president, Xi Jinping, burned in Indian cities.


    In his first public comments on the dispute, prime minister Narendra Modi led a two-minute silence for the killed soldiers and said India would “defend every stone, every inch of its territory.”


    “I would like to assure the nation that the sacrifice of our jawans [troops] will not be in vain,” said Modi, speaking at a televised meeting of India’s chief ministers. “For us, the unity and sovereignty of the country is the most important.”


    A day after reports of the “violent face-off” in the western Himalayas emerged, Indian news outlets began naming some of the dead and a clearer picture started to build of what transpired on Monday night on the high, steep ridge lines above the fast-flowing Galwan River.
    The killings were sparked when a patrol of Indian soldiers encountered Chinese troops in a steep section of the mountainous region they believed the People’s Liberation Army had retreated from, in line with a 6 June disengagement agreement, sources in Delhi said.


    The two armies jostled and hand-to-hand fighting broke out – neither side armed in line with decades of tradition supposed to ward off the possibility of escalation between the nuclear-armed neighbours.


    Then an Indian commanding officer was pushed, fell from the narrow ridge and fell to his death in the gorge below.


    Reinforcements from the Indian side were summoned from a post about 2 miles away and eventually about 600 men were fighting with stones, iron rods and other makeshift weapons in near-total darkness for up to six hours, Indian government sources said, with most deaths on both sides occurring from soldiers falling or being knocked from mountain terrain.




    At least four more Indian soldiers were said to be in critical condition. Indian media outlets cited intelligence sources claiming up to 50 Chinese soldiers may have been killed in the melee but did not present the evidence. Chinese CCTV’s widely watched evening news broadcast made no mention of the border confrontation on Tuesday.


    In a phonecall on Wednesday night between the Chinese foreign minister, Wang Yi, and India’s minister for external affairs, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, the two sides “agreed to deal fairly with the serious event” and continue with de-escalation, according to a statement by China’s foreign ministry.


    China also reportedly rebuked India, asking the government to control its troops and punish those responsible for the conflict.


    As photos and details of some of the Indian soldiers who died were circulated on Tuesday there were small demonstrations including in Bhopal in Madhya Pradesh state and in the Gujarati city Ahmedabad, where protesters burned pictures of Xi Jinping.




    Former Indian army officers argued in fiery television debates that China had unilaterally changed both the status quo on the border and the rules of engagement. “Somebody has to answer for 20 lives,” said retired air vice-marshal Manmohan Bahadur.


    But whereas violence in recent years linked to Pakistan has led to aggressive rhetoric and promises of swift retaliation from Indian leaders, Monday’s violence has so far drawn a much more muted response including from Modi.


    Analysts said the caution reflected both shock at the scale of the killing and the complexity of the relationship between the two Asian giants. “There is the larger picture of the asymmetries of power,” said Srikanth Kondapalli, a professor of Chinese studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi. “China’s GDP is $14tn, India’s is less than $3tn. China spends nearly $220bn on the military but India spends $52bn.”


    He said Delhi would be considering whether to ask commanders on the ground to sort out the conflict with their Chinese counterparts, but would also be under pressure to escalate.


    The United Nations, EU and US government have expressed concern over the violence and urged restraint.


    Indian media have reported that talks between commanders have been held, and high-level Indian officials were meeting at the ministry of defence, India Today reported.


    Both countries’ militaries have blamed the other for the conflict.


    Beijing has refused to confirm any deaths on its side, but accused India of crossing the border twice and “provoking and attacking Chinese personnel”.


    The editor-in-chief of the state-run the Global Times, said he understood there had been Chinese casualties, but the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) wanted to avoid “stoking public mood” by comparing numbers.


    An editorial in the same paper said: “China does not want to turn border issues with India into a confrontation,” before blaming India for “arrogance and recklessness”.


    Both parties have been working towards de-escalation in recent weeks but the loss of life makes the situation even more complicated and precarious.


    Chinese state media has reported the PLA is conducting joint military exercises “aimed at the destruction of key hostile hubs in a high-elevation mountainous region”. The PLA Tibet Military Command conducted live fire drills with heavy artillery on Tuesday, with reports linking the PLA’s preparedness for high-elevation combat to the clashes with India.
    Soldiers fell to their deaths as India and China's troops fought with rocks | World news | The Guardian

  4. #29
    Thailand Expat
    Little Chuchok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    14-03-2024 @ 03:41 PM
    Posts
    10,025
    NEW DELHI: In a strong message, external affairs minister S Jaishankar on Wednesday told his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi that the unprecedented incident in Galwan Valley will have a serious impact on the bilateral relationship and asked China to take corrective steps.

    Jaishankar and Wang held a telephonic conversation in the wake of Monday night's violent clash between the two armies in Galwan Valley in which 20 Indian Army personnel including a Colonel were killed.



    "The external affairs minister conveyed the protest of the government of India in the strongest terms on the violent face-off in Galwan Valley on June 15," the ministry of external affairs said.

    It said Jaishankar referred to a meeting between senior military commanders of the two sides on June 6 where an agreement was reached on de-escalation and disengagement along the Line of Actual Control (LAC).

    Jaishankar conveyed to Wang that while there was some progress on the situation, the Chinese side sought to erect a structure in Galwan valley on the Indian side of the LAC.

    "While this became a source of dispute, the Chinese side took pre-meditated and planned action that was directly responsible for the resulting violence and casualties," the MEA said giving details of the conversation.

    Jaishankar conveyed that it reflected an intent to change the facts on ground in violation of all the agreements to not change the status quo.



    "The External Affairs Minister underlined that this unprecedented development will have a serious impact on the bilateral relationship. The need of the hour was for the Chinese side to reassess its actions and take corrective steps," the MEA said.



    "The two sides should scrupulously and sincerely implement the understanding that was reached by the senior commanders on June 6," it said.



    "Troops of both sides should also abide by the bilateral agreements and protocols. They should strictly respect and observe the Line of Actual Control and should not take any unilateral action to alter it," the MEA said.



    In the talks, it was agreed that the overall situation would be handled in a responsible manner, and both sides would implement the disengagement understanding of June 6 sincerely, the MEA said.

    Chinese side took pre-meditated, planned action in Galwan: India | India News - Times of India


  5. #30
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,541
    FFS calm it down lads.

    Now it's India 20-China 43

    What a tremendous bottom-of-the-table dogfight.

    Officers and men of the Indian Army and the People's Liberation Army Ground Force (PLAGF) fought a lethal hand-to-hand battle Monday night in sub-zero temperatures resulting in more than 60 deaths on both sides.

    China and India confirm there was no gun battle in this lethal encounter, which was the deadliest since 1975.

    They also said the casualty toll will rise.


    The "violent face-off" or brawl took place at the high-altitude terrain of the disputed Galwan Valley along their porous border called the Line of Actual Control (LAC). The LAC, which is 3,488 kilometers long, separates India's Ladakh province from China's Aksai-Chin region.


    The clash on India's side of the LAC in Ladakh province caused the deaths of at least 20 Indian Army soldiers and
    43 Chinese soldiers, according to some sources. Chinese media quoting military sources said the PLAGF had lost five dead and had 11 injured. It was violent hand-to-hand scuffles, said an Indian Army officer.


    The Indian Army initially said the brawl at the mountainous terrain injured 17 more of its men. It later announced these men had frozen to death as a result of their injuries. It initially revealed the deaths of the Commanding Officer of a battalion deployed to the valley, a junior commissioned officer and a soldier.


    "The loss of lives
    on the Indian side includes an officer and two soldiers. Senior military officials of the two sides are currently meeting at the venue to defuse the situation."


    Indian Army sources said both sides were engaged in disengagement talks before the lethal brawl occurred.

    They surmise a quarrel might have ensued. This quarrel escalated to the point there was "pushing and shoving."

    "The area where they met is very treacherous and mountainous" said sources quoted by Indian media. "In the pushing and shoving, the three seem to have slipped. We don't know if it was deliberate or it happened during the pushing and shoving."

    The Indian Army sources said the PLAGF Tuesday morning reached out and called for a meeting between the Major Generals of both sides to defuse escalating tensions.


    The fatal clash was not unexpected. It follows a six-week-long stand-off between Indian and Chinese soldiers marked by fistfights and stone-throwing. Several soldiers from both sides were injured in a May 9 brawl.


    India's Ministry of External Affairs accused China of breaking an agreement struck last week to respect the LAC in the Galwan Valley. It said the fight occurred because of an attempt by the Chinese to unilaterally change the status quo in the area.


    Long Xingchun, president of the Chengdu Institute of World Affairs, an independent think tank, said the clash might reach the point of no return unless contained. He pointed out the deaths are the first in the decades-long border conflict between China and India, which fought the Sino-Indian War in 1962.


    "So it is imperative for both sides, especially between national leaders, to calm down the situation and tighten the border control, instead of being swayed by extremists," according to Long. He said China and India must not allow nationalist fervor to inflame tensions at the border.


    Zhang Shuli, spokesperson of China's Western Theatre Command, which oversees the Galwan Valley, accused Indian troops of again crossing the LAC illegally. He also claimed the sovereignty of the Galwan River Valley historically belongs to China. He admitted to casualties on the Chinese side but refused to say how many were dead and injured.


    Zhao Lijian, China's Foreign Ministry spokesman, claimed Indian troops crossed the border line twice on Monday. He claimed Indian Army soldiers provoked and attacked Chinese personnel, resulting in a serious physical confrontation.
    Brawl Kills 60 Chinese And Indian Soldiers Along Disputed Border

  6. #31
    The Dentist English Noodles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Gaslightingshire
    Posts
    17,808
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    Now it's India 20-China 43
    The Chinese are saying they had 43 casualties, not fatalities.

  7. #32
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,541
    Quote Originally Posted by English Noodles View Post
    The Chinese are saying they had 43 casualties, not fatalities.
    Well you just know they're trying to fix the game, don't you.

  8. #33
    En route
    Cujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    24-02-2024 @ 04:47 PM
    Location
    Reality.
    Posts
    32,939
    Quote Originally Posted by Little Chuchok View Post
    NEW DELHI: In a strong message, external affairs minister S Jaishankar on Wednesday told his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi that the unprecedented incident in Galwan Valley will have a serious impact on the bilateral relationship and asked China to take corrective steps.

    Jaishankar and Wang held a telephonic conversation in the wake of Monday night's violent clash between the two armies in Galwan Valley in which 20 Indian Army personnel including a Colonel were killed.



    "The external affairs minister conveyed the protest of the government of India in the strongest terms on the violent face-off in Galwan Valley on June 15," the ministry of external affairs said.

    It said Jaishankar referred to a meeting between senior military commanders of the two sides on June 6 where an agreement was reached on de-escalation and disengagement along the Line of Actual Control (LAC).

    Jaishankar conveyed to Wang that while there was some progress on the situation, the Chinese side sought to erect a structure in Galwan valley on the Indian side of the LAC.

    "While this became a source of dispute, the Chinese side took pre-meditated and planned action that was directly responsible for the resulting violence and casualties," the MEA said giving details of the conversation.

    Jaishankar conveyed that it reflected an intent to change the facts on ground in violation of all the agreements to not change the status quo.



    "The External Affairs Minister underlined that this unprecedented development will have a serious impact on the bilateral relationship. The need of the hour was for the Chinese side to reassess its actions and take corrective steps," the MEA said.



    "The two sides should scrupulously and sincerely implement the understanding that was reached by the senior commanders on June 6," it said.



    "Troops of both sides should also abide by the bilateral agreements and protocols. They should strictly respect and observe the Line of Actual Control and should not take any unilateral action to alter it," the MEA said.



    In the talks, it was agreed that the overall situation would be handled in a responsible manner, and both sides would implement the disengagement understanding of June 6 sincerely, the MEA said.

    Chinese side took pre-meditated, planned action in Galwan: India | India News - Times of India

    You need to highlight some relevant points in yellow for our chinkie sycophant hoho.

  9. #34
    Thailand Expat OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:59 AM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    25,218
    The story is as I suggested.

    Our resident psychopaths, and the regime controlled BBC call and highlight for war, war. The two country's spokesmen choose jaw, jaw.

    As illustrated in the two more intelligent articles above.

  10. #35
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,541
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    The story is as I suggested.

    Our resident psychopaths, and the regime controlled BBC call and highlight for war, war.
    What utter rubbish. Who the fuck wants two nuclear powers at war you idiot?

  11. #36
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 10:17 AM
    Posts
    18,476
    The sooner the chinks get a new ass torn for them, the better.

  12. #37
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    26-09-2021 @ 10:28 PM
    Posts
    10,105
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    Who the fuck wants two nuclear powers at war you idiot?
    Did he say "nuclear"? To my knowledge there have been many permanent wars performed by almost all the powers owning the nukes but not using the nukes (so far - just one did).

    And there are many others who like such wars, it brings huge business boom and jobs...(only useful idiots do not see it...)

  13. #38
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,541
    Quote Originally Posted by Seekingasylum View Post
    The sooner the chinks get a new ass torn for them, the better.
    Sadly I don't think India is the country to do it.

  14. #39
    I'm in Jail

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Online
    14-12-2023 @ 11:54 AM
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    13,986
    Pretty brutal :



    Hundreds of Chinese troops reportedly hunted down dozens of Indian soldiers and beat them with batons wrapped in barbed wire and clubs embedded with nails.


    Hundreds of Chinese troops reportedly hunted down dozens of Indian soldiers and beat them with batons wrapped in barbed wire | Business Insider India




  15. #40
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    26-09-2021 @ 10:28 PM
    Posts
    10,105
    After all, the Indians are so kind to their border friends in Kashmir...

  16. #41
    Thailand Expat
    panama hat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Last Online
    21-10-2023 @ 08:08 AM
    Location
    Way, Way South of the border now - thank God!
    Posts
    32,680
    Quote Originally Posted by Klondyke View Post
    After all, the Indians are so kind to their border friends in Kashmir...
    Irrelevant, isn't it. What is it with you and your whataboutism. Would you also suggest that China can't complain if they get flattened by nuclear wapons because . . . well, look at how they treat the Uighurs.

    Russia? Shouldn't feel sorry for them if Moscow is blown to shit by Ukranians because . . . well, look at what they did in Grosny

    dense dense

  17. #42
    Thailand Expat lom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    on my way
    Posts
    11,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Klondyke View Post
    After all, the Indians are so kind to their border friends in Kashmir...
    "Kashmir, which is home to about 10 million people, is one of the most disputed territories in the world; India and
    Pakistan have fought over it since 1947. The region has been partitioned, with India controlling roughly 45% and
    Pakistan controlling 35%.
    China also seized portions of the territory via a war with India in 1962 and controls roughly 20% of the region."

    China could learn from India and Pakistan and stop barbaric fighting methods:


  18. #43
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    26-09-2021 @ 10:28 PM
    Posts
    10,105
    ^Many thanks for the link 12 years old, the situation nowadays is not very pleasant:

    Pakistan says four civilians killed by Indian shelling across LoC
    Pakistani army accuses Indian troops of 'unprovoked' fire in disputed Kashmir region.

    23 hours ago


    Pakistan and India have fought two of their three wars over the mountainous territory of Kashmir [File: Channi Anand/AP]

    Islamabad, Pakistan - At least four civilians have been killed by Indian shelling inside Pakistan-administered Kashmir, Pakistan's military and local officials said.

    Three people were killed in the Nakyal region, while a fourth person died after a shell hit her home in the Baghsar area, the military said in a statement released late on Wednesday.

    Pakistan says four civilians killed by Indian shelling across LoC | Kashmir News News | Al Jazeera

  19. #44
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    26-09-2021 @ 10:28 PM
    Posts
    10,105
    Quote Originally Posted by lom View Post
    China could learn from India and Pakistan and stop barbaric fighting methods:


    Pakistan is stunned as India retracts Kashmir’s semiautonomous rights

    ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Pakistan reacted with shock and anger Tuesday to India’s sudden decree revoking a 65-year-old law that had granted limited political autonomy to the disputed Himalayan border region of Kashmir.

    Kashmir, long a flash point in contentious relations between the nuclear-armed neighbors, has seen 30 years of unrest, including guerrilla attacks, protests by Muslims and allegations of repression by Indian security forces. Now, Pakistani officials and others say they fear there is worse to come.

    Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan, in a grim address to a special joint session of Parliament, accused India’s Hindu nationalist leadership of promoting a “racist ideology.” He said that after making numerous attempts at outreach, he has concluded that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his government “took our overtures for peace as weakness.”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...814_story.html

  20. #45
    Thailand Expat
    panama hat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Last Online
    21-10-2023 @ 08:08 AM
    Location
    Way, Way South of the border now - thank God!
    Posts
    32,680
    Quote Originally Posted by Klondyke View Post
    ^Many thanks for the link 12 years old


    Quote Originally Posted by Klondyke View Post
    Pakistan is stunned as India retracts Kashmir’s semiautonomous rights
    "August 7, 2019 "

    Hypocrite

  21. #46
    In Uranus
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    30,411

    Why conventional wisdom giving China the military edge over India may not be true

    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    Sadly I don't think India is the country to do it.
    You are wrong there.

    India and China went to war in 1962 over the same Himalayan region where at least 20 soldiers were killed Monday night in a bloody confrontation between the two sides.A little under six decades ago, one month of combat resulted in a Chinese military victory, with Beijing declaring a cease-fire after securing de facto control ofAksai Chin, an area claimed by both countries. The month-long battle claimed the lives of around 700 Chinese troops and approximately double that on the Indian side.

    But the militaries that face off in the Himalayas today are far different from those that fought 58 years ago.

    Conventional wisdom has it that China holds a significant military advantage over India, but recent studies from the Belfer Center at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government in Boston and the Center for a New American Security in Washington suggest India maintains an edge in high-altitude mountainous environments, such as the one where the 2020 face-off is taking place.

    Nuclear weapons

    No one expects the fresh tensions to explode into nuclear war, but the fact that both China and India have become nuclear powers since their previous encounter cannot be ignored when assessing the balance of power.

    Beijing became a nuclear power in 1964 and India in 1974.

    Figures released this week by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIRPI) estimate China has approximately 320 nuclear warheads -- more than double India's 150. Both powers have seen their arsenals grow in the past year, Beijing's by 40 warheads and New Delhi's by 10, according to SIRPI.

    Both countries maintain a triad of delivery systems -- missiles, bombers and submarines. Both also ascribe to a "no first use" policy, however, meaning they've pledged only to use nuclear arms in retaliation to a nuclear attack on their county.

    Air forces

    India has about 270 fighters and 68 ground-attack aircraft it could bring to bear in combat with China, according to a study published in March by the Belfer Center.

    New Delhi also maintains a string of small air bases near the Chinese border from which it can stage and supply those aircraft, the Belfer study, authored by Frank O'Donnell and Alexander Bollfrass, claimed.

    China, by contrast, has 157 fighters and a small fleet of ground-attack drones in the region, the Belfer study said. The People's Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) uses eight bases in the region, but most of those are civilian airfields at problematic elevations, the study suggests.

    "The high altitude of Chinese air bases in Tibet and Xinjiang, plus the generally difficult geographic and weather conditions of the region, means that Chinese fighters are limited to carrying around half their design payload and fuel," the study claims.

    Aerial refueling could give the Chinese planes more payload and combat time, but the PLAAF doesn't have enough aerial tankers to get the job done, the study suggests.

    The Belfor study also gives the Indian Air Force (IAF), with its Mirage 2000 and Sukhoi Su-30 jets, a qualitative edge in the region, where China fields J-10, J-11 and Su-27 fighters.

    The Indian Mirage 2000 and Su-30 jets are all-weather, multi-role aircraft -- while of the Chinese jets, only the J-10 has those abilities.

    Meanwhile, India has built up its bases in the region with China in mind, according to an October 2019 report from the Center for a New American Security.

    "To weather a potential People's Liberation Army (PLA) attack, India has placed greater emphasis on infrastructure hardening; base resiliency; redundant command, control, and communications systems; and improved air defense," the report claims.

    The Belfer study points out that China, facing perceived threats from the United States on its eastern and southern flanks, has strengthened its bases there to the neglect of the Himalayas, leaving at least four PLA airbases vulnerable.

    "Indian destruction or temporary incapacitation of some of the four above air bases would further exacerbate these PLAAF operational inflexibilities and weaknesses," it claims.

    The Belfer report gives the edge to India's air force in one other area -- experience.

    "Recent conflicts with Pakistan give the current IAF a level of institutional experience in actual networked combat," it says.

    Lacking such experience, Chinese pilots may have difficulty thinking for themselves in a dynamic aerial battlefield, according to the Belfer report.

    "Recent PLAAF exercises with unscripted scenarios have found that pilots are excessively reliant upon ground control for tactical direction," it says. "This suggests that PLAAF combat proficiency may be significantly weaker than often estimated."

    Ground forces

    While India has the experience in the air, the CNAS report says it is also hardened on the ground, fighting in places like Kashmir and in skirmishes along its border with Pakistan.

    "India is by far the more experienced and battle-hardened party, having fought a series of limited and low-intensity conflicts in its recent past," the CNAS report says. "The PLA, on the other hand, has not experienced the crucible of combat since its conflict with Vietnam in 1979."

    That month-long border war, launched by China in response to Vietnam's military intervention in Cambodia, is largely considered a defeat for China. The PLA had trouble making gains against Vietnamese troops that were smaller in number but vastly more experienced after fighting US forces during the Vietnam War.

    Yet while there may be a big gap in experience in the Himalayas today, there is reportedly parity in the numbers of ground troops. Belfer estimates there are about 225,000 Indian ground forces in the region, as well as 200,000 to 230,000 Chinese.

    The numbers may be misleading, however. Counted among those PLA forces are units assigned to keep down any chance of insurrection in Xinjiang or Tibet, or deal with any potential conflict along China's border with Russia.
    Moving them to the Indian front in the event of large-scale hostilities presents a logistical problem, as Indian airstrikes could target high-speed rail lines on the Tibetan plateau or choke points in the mountainous terrain closer to the border.

    "By contrast, Indian forces are already largely in position," the report says.

    However, the CNAS report adds that those Indian forces operate in rough terrain in steep valleys and can't be easily moved to plug breaches that any Chinese incursion might make. In short, the Indian troops too could be vulnerable to Chinese artillery and missile attacks on choke points in the mountains.

    Those attacks could come by Chinese artillery or missiles stationed on the Tibetan plateau, which in some cases look right down on Indian border posts, the CNAS report says.

    But the question is whether, in the event of large-scale conflict, China has enough missiles to take out all the targets it would need to hit in India.

    The Belfer study cites estimates of a former Indian Air Force officer, who predicts China would need 220 ballistic missiles to knock out one Indian airfield for a day. With only 1,000 to 1,200 missiles available for the task, China would quickly run out of the means to shut down India's airfields, it says.

    One area where China may be gaining advantage is technology and new weapons. With a larger defense budget and rapidly modernizing military, Beijing can't be counted out to close any gaps in its forces.

    "China's economy is five times the size of India's and Beijing's defense spending far outstrips New Delhi's defense budget by a factor of four to one," said Nishank Motwani, international adviser at the National Center for Dialogue and Progress in Afghanistan. "The power differential between China and India is in Beijing's favor and this asymmetry is only widening."

    Chinese state media has recently been heavy on articles and videos of new weaponry being deployed to its Tibetan region for exercises, including the Type 15 light tank and the new 155-millimeter vehicle-mounted howitzer. Both were introduced to the Chinese public at last year's much-hyped National Day military parade in Beijing.

    "The weapons were specifically designed with advantages for plateau regions and can play important roles in safeguarding border areas," military experts told the state-sponsored Global Times.

    The Chinese outlet on Tuesday --- after the clash with Indian troops the night before -- mentioned the new weapons in a report on war games in the mountainous region.

    "These kinds of drills demonstrated the PLA's capability to win a regional, high-elevation conflict in its early stages by decisively eradicating the hostile headquarters and commanders, a PLA veteran who was once deployed in Tibet and asked not to be named told the Global Times," the report said.

    Allies

    While China may be largely on its own facing off against India in the Himalayas, New Delhi has been developing defense relationships with countries wary of Beijing as a rising military power.

    New Delhi has grown closer to the United States military in recent years, with Washington calling India a "major defense partner" while increasing bi- and multilateral training.

    In the event of a large-scale Himalayan conflict, US intelligence and surveillance could help India get a clearer picture of the battlefield.

    The Belfer report uses the example of what might happen if China was to surge troops from its interior to the front lines in the mountains.

    "Such a Chinese surge would also attract attention from the United States, which would alert India and enable it to counter-mobilize its own additional forces from its interior," it says.

    India participates in joint military drills with countries like the US, Japan, France and Australia.

    "Western troops participating in such war games and exercises regularly have expressed a grudging admiration for their Indian counterparts' tactical creativity and high degree of adaptability," the CNAS report says.

    "China's joint training endeavors, on the other hand, thus far have remained relatively rudimentary in scope — with the notable exception of its increasingly advanced military exercises with Pakistan and Russia."

    https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/17/asia/...cli/index.html

  22. #47
    กงเกวียนกำเกวียน HuangLao's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    สุโขทัย
    Posts
    10,142
    Bit of a convenient and timely distraction.

    ....and so it goes.

  23. #48
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    26-09-2021 @ 10:28 PM
    Posts
    10,105
    Quote Originally Posted by panama hat View Post
    Originally Posted by Klondyke
    ^Many thanks for the link 12 years old


    Originally Posted by Klondyke
    Pakistan is stunned as India retracts Kashmir’s semiautonomous rights
    "August 7, 2019 "

    Hypocrite
    You cannot resist not to comment, whatever stupid such a comment is...

    Is the situation now better now after 3/4 year, or rather as 12 years ago?

  24. #49
    Thailand Expat
    panama hat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Last Online
    21-10-2023 @ 08:08 AM
    Location
    Way, Way South of the border now - thank God!
    Posts
    32,680
    Quote Originally Posted by Klondyke View Post
    You cannot resist not to comment, whatever stupid such a comment is...
    Your comments are always stupid enough to comment on. Q. e. d.

  25. #50
    Thailand Expat OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:59 AM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    25,218
    1962 India-China war redeux?

    June 18, 2020 by M. K. BHADRAKUMAR

    China-India Border Tensions-aksai-chin-3-jpg

    Indian & Chinese patrols challenge each other, typically, in Ladakh. File photo

    "
    The Indian analysts have been comparing the military build-up in the India-China border in eastern Ladakh to the Doklam standoff in 2017. This was only to be expected since the leitmotif was once again a road construction in disputed border regions.

    In Doklam, India feared that the Chinese road would give its military access to heights from where it could threaten the Siliguri Corridor, India’s tenuous link with its north-eastern regions.

    In Ladakh, Indian analysts estimate, Chinese military has positioned itself to challenge road construction by India that could threaten Aksai Chin and NH 219, the tenuous Xinjiang-Tibet highway.

    Interestingly, China did not protest when we re-opened the Daulat Beg Oldie air base in 2008 after abandoning it during the 1962 war or even when the Indian Air Force built it up rapidly to such a scale that by 2013, one of its newly acquired Lockheed Martin C-130J-30 transport aircraft could land there.

    Nor did China protest at any point through a two-decade period when the 255-km long Darbuk-Shyokh-Daulat Beg Oldie (DSDBO) all-weather road was completed. This is notwithstanding the fact that the DSDBO road cuts down the time taken for sending reinforcements or making forward deployments of troops and equipment from two days previously taken to just six hours — a game changer, so to speak.

    Amidst the tumultuous events in the most recent days in eastern Ladakh, we somehow lose sight of all this. Therefore, a primary question arises while making our assessments:

    Why is China now all perked up when it was reconciled with the reopening of the Daulat Beg Oldie military base at the easternmost point of the Karakoram Range in a cold desert region in the far north of India, just 8 km south of the Chinese border and just 9 km northwest of the Aksai Chin Line of Actual Control between the two countries, and just 10 km from the Karakoram Pass that separates Tibet from Xinjiang?

    China-India Border Tensions-aksai-china-1-jpg


    The answer is, China no longer thinks that it can afford to take lightly the steady Indian build-up of military infrastructure in that region — known as Sub Sector North (which lies just to the east of Siachen glacier and is the only area that provides direct access to Aksai Chin from India.)
    Clearly, China does not want any threatening build-up of military infrastructure in the SSN. However, we have also begun constructing branch roads from the DSDBO in the northerly direction, which allows us to get behind the Chinese defences via a number of spurs, known as ‘fingers’, coming down from the north.

    Now, through the Indus Valley to the north of SSN on the Chinese side runs the immensely strategic highway NH 219 which connects Tibet with Xinjiang and where the Chinese base with an airfield is located at Ngari. (To put things in perspective, Ngari is only 50 km from Demchok and here we have the terrain advantage; while, Ngari can also be threatened from Chumar.)

    Historically, before the 1962 war, China thought it had secured all territories it needed to that was required for the security of the Tibet-Xinjiang NH 219 highway. In fact, following the 1962 war, when China unilaterally declared a ceasefire and vacated all additional captured territory, it also gave up control of the tactically important areas in Ladakh that could give access to Aksai Chin and NH 219. But they have become hotspots today.

    Suffice to say, Chinese seem to think we have reoccupied those vacant spaces and are building sinews that enable us to challenge the NH 219 if push comes to shove in the relations. China has become highly suspicious of the Indian intentions.
    Arguably, China has somehow come to believe that in the long term, India’s strategic aim is to restore the status quo ante 1950 by recovering Aksai Chin and other areas secured by China prior to the 1962 war.

    A former commander of Indian Army’s Northern Command, Lt. Gen. HS Panag wrote recently, “Much as I would like to speculate about China’s broader political aims, the direct political aim is simple — to maintain the “status quo” along the LAC on its own terms, which is to forestall any threat, howsoever remote, to Aksai Chin and NH 219.”

    China-India Border Tensions-aksai-chin-2-768x596-jpg

    NH 219, tenuous mountain road linking Tibet with Xinjiang

    How did this breakdown in trust happen? The roots lie in the UPA era. In strategic terms, India’s ‘forward policy’ in eastern Ladakh that began during the UPA rule can only be regarded as a template of the overall militarisation of the country’s foreign policy, which accelerated during the 2010-2014 period.
    This was a period, following the signing of the US-Indian nuclear accord in 2008, when the US-Indian relationship underwent a historic transformation and the doctrine of ‘interoperability’ with the American military surreptitiously began permeating the Indian strategic calculus. That process eventually turned into one of tying India down somehow in the American stable.

    Conceivably, some among the Indian bureaucratic elite would have facilitated this happening at a time when the UPA leadership of Manmohan Singh was getting battered and distracted and hopelessly besieged, and domestic politics had entered a turbulent phase signifying the Congress Party’s terminal sickness. The Americans should be eternally grateful to their war horses in the Indian wood work.

    Be that as it may, India’s foreign policy got co-related to the alliance with the US, and a belief grew, which the present government inherited, that a muscular approach towards China becomes sustainable and that is the language China will come to fear, now that the Sino-American tensions are also cascading.


    On the other hand, given the ultra-nationalist fervour sweeping the country, sections of the Indian public also began believing in our own rhetoric that the Indian military is today more than a match for China’s — that, in a conflict in the Himalayas, India can give a ‘bloody nose’ to the Chinese military.

    Indeed, such beliefs are delusional. China is a superpower. Although Indian military strength has increased in the recent decades, the fact remains that China has phenomenally modernised its armed forces with technologies that have a force multiplier effect that are way beyond India’s capability.
    Nonetheless, delusional thinking is rampant in our country, including among sections of the elite who ought to know better. This is further compounded by the ‘testiness’ in India’s posturing toward China in the period since the Doklam standoff, which the establishment spin had touted as a victory, but experts increasingly debunked as a mere face-saving retreat.

    Meanwhile, provocative moves such as the presence of the Tibetan government-in-exile in India; the aggressive claims on Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (POK) and Gilgit Baltistan; talk of abandoning the ‘One China’ policy; the dalliance with the US over ‘Wuhan virus’; the challenge to the $60 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor; and of course the overall lurch toward ‘Quad’ signalling an intention to bandwagon with the US’ containment strategy against China — all these were manifestations of such ‘testiness’.

    They might have been intended as pinpricks we do not know, but they have indeed contributed significantly to vitiate the climate of India-China relationship and create mutual suspicions.

    However, the red line was breached when the government followed up its decision last August on abrogating Article 370 of the constitution to change the status of J&K by making a breathtaking territorial claim on Aksai Chin, enshrining the claim on a map, which in military terms could only imply from the Chinese perspective a strategic intention on our part to severe Tibet’s link with Xinjiang — nothing more, nothing less.

    Indeed, while all these shenanigans were playing out, strategic communication was conspicuous by its total absence in the relationship during the period since ‘China Connect’ in October last year.

    Quite obviously, in the light of all these major shifts in Indian policies, China began to read a new meaning into the feverish road construction activities close to the LAC, the attempts to create feeder roads of the DSDBO leading to Aksai Chin and so on.

    A cloud of suspicions has formed which is going to be extremely difficult to dispel in a near term. Unless we properly assess the Chinese motivations, negotiations with that country will be meaningless.

    Is it the case that China is seeking territorial expansion? If so, there is no scope for negotiations. But China insists it doesn’t want war with India, nor does India want war with it.

    Is it that Chinese Communist Party leadership has become so weak due to the coronavirus pandemic that it is punching India to flex its muscles? Ridiculous as this may seem, this question must be asked because some of our top China hands do read the tea leaves this way!
    Or, is China on a deliberate path to humiliate India? But then, to work on such a motivation, China has other non-military means instead of enacting a gruesome murderous scene in the Himalayas.

    Is China conspiring with Pakistan to create a two-front war for India? For sure, there is no empirical evidence whatsoever in that direction.

    What else could be there in the Chinese calculus? Surprisingly, there is hardly any willingness in the Indian narratives to consider whether China too might have its own security concerns over our long-term intentions.

    An honest appraisal becomes difficult because it is entangled with the government’s decision on Article 370, which of course is cast in iron and is apparently irrevocable, as it is linked to the ruling elite’s ideology — plus, our ‘pivot’ to America, which is at the core of India’s foreign policy but about which our elites do not even want to talk about after Trump presented his mediatory offer to bring about India-China reconciliation, signalling his neutrality and disinterest in getting dragged into the current standoff.

    We do not realise that the government’s words and actions are taken seriously by India’s neighbours — be it China or Nepal or Bangladesh. Perhaps, we can convince Dhaka some day that we actually do not regard Bangladeshi nationals as ‘termites’.
    But how can the government possibly say to the Chinese that the claim to Aksai Chin is a mere posturing for domestic consumption only and not to be taken seriously as a statement of policy when it was stated in all solemnity by senior figures in the government that they do intend to gain control of that region some day?

    When China protested strongly over the August decision on J&K — not once but twice — we ignored it. And to compound matters, we simply turned our back and walked over to the ‘Quad’ alliance with the US, upgrading it to ministerial level, and thereafter began following the American footfalls on Taiwan and Covid-19 to taunt and humiliate Beijing.

    Most certainly, the public opinion in India is furious over the cruel killing of so many Indian soldiers in Ladakh on June 15-16. Feelings are running high. There is loud clamour for ‘retaliation’. But unless there is public awareness of the eddies in India’s China policy, a rational response to the horrific incident is not going to be possible.

    The buck stops with the Indian leadership. Whereas Indian nationalism should have been utilised to spur the country’s transformation as a middle income country in a conceivable future and to eradicate the poverty affecting the lives of hundreds of millions of Indians, it has degenerated into jingoism and the stuff of grandstanding by the ruling elite.


    What purpose the annulment of Article 370 achieved is debatable. But without doubt, it has damaged the India-China relationship.
    "

    1962 India-China war redeux? - Indian Punchline
    A tray full of GOLD is not worth a moment in time.

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •