War and change in world politics was rooted in competitions among the great powers, which struggled for security, wellbeing, and leadership. He contended that the great commercial seafaring states in particular would play a leading role in world politics because of the wealth they generated from international trade. In 1480, Spain was a collection of little kingdoms, eager to fight each other. By 1500, Spain held title to half the globe. British control of the seas, combined with a corresponding decline in the naval strength of its major European rivals, paved the way for Great Britain's emergence as the world's dominant military, political, and economic power. At the beginning of the 19th century, as the leader of the industrial revolution, Britain became the workshop of the world. As other countries industrialized, however, they challenged Britain’s leading position in world manufactures. The passing of the era when Britain was the world’s leading industrial power also pointed to a waning of its leadership as a naval power. In 1850, Germany was little more than a no-man's land between the territory of the great powers. To check Russian power in Asia, Britain did take the extraordinary step of breaking out of its “splendid isolation” and concluding a formal alliance with Japan in 1902. This alliance, in turn, emboldened Japan to take on Russia, resulting in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-5. With British backing, Japan inflicted a stunning defeat on Russia. If Russian leaders had concentrated their navy, massing its naval forces rather than scattering them, or showed more offensive zeal in the war at sea, then Russia would have defeated Japan. President Theodore Roosevelt brokered an end to the fighting by hosting negotiations between Japan and Russia. In recognition of his role, Roosevelt would receive the Nobel Peace Prize.
After two warring centuries of political crises and bloodshed, Fa (translates as political norm/model/standard, and it means Legalist's/Realist's instrument/calculator) thinkers contributed greatly to the formation of China’s empire, both on the theoretical level and as political practitioners; and many of their ideas continued to be employed. Politically, the loose aristocratic entities were replaced by centralized and bureaucratized states. Iron utensils brought about urbanization and commercialization. Fa thinkers were political realists who, rejected Confucius, and sought to attain “a rich state and a strong & powerful army” and to ensure domestic stability in an age marked by intense competition. It's China's go-to statecraft, whenever its rulers feel insecure. They have now provided Chinese Communist Party with the most compelling answers on how to unite China and become the "center" of the world. The Chinese word "China" refers to the "center" of the world. It's the missionaries who translated the term as "middle" Kingdom. China has considered itself as "the sole sovereign government of the world'' since its unification in 221 BC". CCP believes that after regaining its status as a great power, it should resume its historical position as the "center/middle of the world". Chinese people have been brainwashed to believe that, lots of ancient Chinese land has been lost to bordering nations like India, which must be taken back into the fold of China. That's part of the history of CCP. Han Chinese think that India became a country after inheriting their land from Britain. Unlike China, modern India got its freedom by peaceful struggle and is made up of diverse lands and people of different backgrounds and cultures. Every few kilometers, the language and custom changes. Chinese cannot understand how there is a united Indian-ess, instead of collapse, when there is such diversity. Chinese point to Indian's being hired to run the richest US tech companies in Silicon Valley, as some proof of "a slave mindset"; however, they forget that decades of China prosperity is dependent on their workers getting slave wages in order to produce cheap goods for US markets. Power abhors a vacuum. Since the US financial crisis, "China believes in power politics and its own natural superiority. It talks about a multi-polar world, but Beijing’s vision for Asia is strictly hierarchical—with China at the top—and does not consider India an equal." Chinese scholars and policymakers know little about the neighbourhood. Old impressions about the negative impact of caste, poverty, and regionalism in India are still common in Chinese writings. China will employ every tool in its box and remind India of the asymmetry in power to outline its hierarchical superiority. The prospect of de-escalation also appears remote, with thousands of PLA troops still present and China also bolstering infrastructure close to LAC and the eastern sector. We’d like more money for more platforms and increased capacity, but what can we actually afford while we increase our deployment readiness? India must disrupt the facts that China has forced India to spend huge sum of money for a two-front War. Modi has bet selected "AatmaNirbhar Bharat" as the way. The emerging India-U.S. strategic partnership, and India’s signing of foundational military agreements with the U.S., has meant that both the Trump and Biden administrations were willing to share intelligence with and help India bolster its capabilities in the maritime arena. China wants to provoke India into ending its current close relationship with the U.S. — a relationship that is not a military alliance. The last time the two sides fought along the India-China border, the U.S. enhanced intelligence sharing with India. This time, in addition to intelligence sharing, the U.S. could fast-track supply of advanced military equipment to India. Chinese chose to flex their muscle just a month after PM Modi and President Xi met at the G-20 Summit in Bali and one week after the annual U.S.-India military exercise – “Yudh Abhyas 2022” (War Simulation or Preparation). Indian army has a new deployment strategy – with one layer of troops who patrol close to the border and a second layer of troops or Quick Reaction Team who, if need be, can be deployed to match the PLA numbers – made the Indian military reaction possible. India insists that restoration of normal relations with China is contingent on restoring peace along the border. "During the meeting, the Indian side therefore made constructive suggestions for resolving the remaining areas" but Chinese come with a "pre-determined mindset" and they are "aggressive and the outcome of the talks was already known to them". India's sole demand which China now terms as "unrealistic" is a return to the pre-April 2020 status quo and stating that China will firmly "safeguard national sovereignty" indicates that Beijing has no plans to give up the claims. Along with these signalling, the China has stepped up major provocation, just ahead of the military commander talks, with PLA incursions in Uttarakhand's Barahoti and Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh. China has been building "militarised villages" close to India. China has decided that it has created enough 'facts on the ground' to present India with a new fait accompli and sees no reason why it should give up its territorial gains and restore the pre-April 2020 status quo at the border. The Chinese government only wants to exploit what the Indian government's expectations are. It's getting harder for India to get concessions from China. The more India wishes to have peace, the more China stalls to get more concessions. India is driven by an assumption that, "China needs India's help because of China's desire for stability in its western borders to its overall national strategy." However, China pretends that any leverage that India holds, is no leverage at all. Hence, China pretends and ignore India whenever it is at a disadvantage. The current Chinese foreign minister has also asked Indian ambassador to help China succeed without bothering about particular border incidents. China knows very well that it's ridiculous to expect concessions, but the intent is to confuse, convolute and delay till China holds the advantage. Chinese will like to keep the Patrolling Point PP15 (area called Hot Spring) close to the site of the 1959 ambush, Demchok, Depsang plains (at the critical Raki Nala Y-Junction, also known as Bottleneck), unresolved till the time, the political cost of not settling it becomes higher than doing so. Chinese officials feel that India is still sleepwalking to the fact that China is more powerful, so it will do what it wants to, and India must deal with the reality on the ground. China says that Indians have an unrealistic expectation, which is not in line with their real military power. China cries foul when India matches the troops levels China has deployed in Ladakh in the name of "training" & "exercise". To date, a significant additional PLA presence still remains in Sirjap, Khurnak Fort, Nyagzu and Rutog areas putting additional pressure on India. PLA is already entrenched 18 km inside India-claimed lines and now wants the creation of a 15-20 km buffer zone or no patrol zone inside India-claimed lines as a precondition for disengagement. The infrastructure in place also means the PLA could quickly return to areas that it previously occupied. Chinese forces have remained near the Gogra border at their previous turnaround and throughout the Galwan valley and east of Kongka La. They continue to improve lines of communication to the region to maintain their presence indefinitely, should they so choose. PLAGF armour presence at Gyantse and armour elements remaining deployed near Gamba. Instead, China's hostility towards India is increasing; since China cannot tolerate even the slightest scratch to its 'reputation', having built an image of an 'invincible superpower' at home, a condition that "goes beyond patriotism and exceptionalism" and seeks to satiate the ever-growing hunger of audiences at home. Chairman Xi is keen to consolidate a third consecutive term, has several other problems on his plate, the quick collapse of Evergrande Group and the real estate market and; some Chinese social media have suggested that Chinese commanders have been 'replaced' was due to the high rate of "mountain sickness" among the officers and soldiers. Chinese media cannot accept the fact that Indian troops are in much better physical condition at freezing altitudes. After all, PLA has spent more money on cold-proof manufacturing, logistic construction, and healthcare resources. Xi has doubled down on nationalist rhetoric and action. The intense bullying of Taiwan and a more hawkish stance towards India are manifestations of that tactic. Sreemoy Talukdar
The greater India’s national strength and international status became, the more its self-esteem and self-confidence would grow, and that much louder its demands for more concessions from China would be. Therefore, it was no longer possible for China to maintain stability in its relations with India by simply continuing its “cooperative strategy” of the past or merely releasing deterrent signals. China needed to reassert its strength advantage and force India to accept Chinese superiority through committed actions. "No full-scale confrontation" does not mean "no confrontation". The key idea is to strike a new balance or equilibrium: where through "controlled" conflicts at the disputed border, a "rising and confident" India is brought under check, and China's strength and psychological advantage in bilateral ties are restored. Chinese media: "If China can resolutely destroy the arrogance of the Indians, through tactical actions at this juncture, Indians will feel that the thighs of Americans are not reliable, and they will return to their traditional non-alignment route." Xi Jinping is not only the president of China and general secretary of the China's Communist party, but also the head of the army. After the statesmanship shown by Deng Xiao Ping (who was educated in France), unquestionably China’s greatest leader, we are now witnessing significant foreign policy changes during a period of prolonged rule by Xi Jinping, who appears determined to make his name in history, by extending China’s maritime and land boundaries through the use of force. Xi's policy had fundamentally shifted to a more aggressive foreign policy because it now has the means to do so, economically, militarily, and diplomatically. China is losing its lustre globally, from the remarkably rapid economic growth it achieved, thanks to the reforms and vision of Deng Xiao Ping who supported “collective leadership” with no more “leader for life”, to create and sustain more efficient government in general that lasted until 2016. Deng Xiao Ping practised what he preached, retired when his 10-year term ended. Since he died, CCP has turned to nationalism and a build-up of conventional military power to support territorial expansion. China is the second-largest foreign investor in Myanmar after Singapore. In Singapore, the CCP has sought to influence many Singaporean elites. 'The Fractured Himalaya': So much of the present crisis with China is seeped in differences which are decades old. Why is the Line of Actual Control contested? How realistic have various Indian leaders been in assessing China and its true intentions? Is there a pattern in China's actions along the contested boundary? Are there not incredible similarities between what we saw in the late fifties and what we are seeing now? Nirupama Rao, the former Indian Foreign Secretary who also served as Ambassador to Beijing explains it all. China is still spreading lies about Galwan Valley, Modi Government & Indian Army must bring closure with formal inquiry. The term “political warfare” comes from George Kennan, and it refers to activities below the threshold of armed conflict. It includes economic coercion, human intelligence operations, and cyber operations includes information and disinformation campaigns on social media platforms. These activities are designed to preserve and expand CCP power while weakening adversaries. FBI and Homeland security do not have enough agents or intelligence analysts to deal with a growing Chinese counter-intelligence campaign—in addition to Russian, Iranian, and other counter-intelligence activity in the US. There is also substantial legal and illegal influence within Congress, corporations and universities, involving lobbyists with links to China. Chinese Communist Party (CCP) believes that only the strong has rights, i.e. "law of the jungle", so they feel the need to flex their military power to threaten their opponents with territorial disputes in order to display to their people that they are getting respect in this world. It doesn't believe in friendly-nations. They believe only in the right of the strong and powerful, taking advantage of gullible or weak nations. China's Communist regime talks about being a "force for peace" and wanting a multi-polar world, but it practices one doctrine, one leader, one party, and one Chinese Han-centric nation. For 40 years, it has declared that China has no territorial desire or "China has never taken one inch of land from other countries", while it tries to claim and 'convince' other nations that large swathes of sovereign territory in these nations belongs to China. At the same time, China has expanded its territory by creating large illegal military islands in South China Sea that are closer to other countries. When Chinese side gets controls an area, then they gaslight by saying there can be "no invasion" by China since the area now belongs to them and how can you be invader of your own land. This is indeed believing that only the strong has rights, i.e. "law of the jungle". The direct consequence is that this will endanger world peace. China's claims on India and the South China Sea are seen as illegal by international law, whom China ignores and calls irrelevant. As expected, this fiery intention has made democratic nations to draw their swords. China's exponential growth follows a hard arithmetic, ensuring that regardless of its future trajectory, in terms of scale, it will not revert to a time before the 1980. China is systematically using its economic and MIC power to replace US with its own brand of domination in Southeast Asia. CCP's territorial expansionism has no limits, unlike other economic and technological powers like US, UK, France, Japan, Germany, Australia. The US has not indulged in territorial expansionism, but the world's policeman, now appears exhausted after two decades of war, while at the same time, China has rocketed from a starving nation to a wealthy nation. In 2018, China scrapped the two-term limit on the presidency. Xi Jinping avowed aim is to create a new international structure or world order, where China is the dominating dragon in size and power, in order to resume its historical position as the "center/middle of the world". In contrast, India's policy or end goals are Not the same as those during colonial times. India sees the value in working with the imperfect world order that exist since WW2, while reforming it through treaties. China doesn't have any old treaties since their government had to flee to Taiwan. This is why China keeps talking about international treaties being unequal with China. China believes that democratic values have become obsolete and CCP's vision for the future is going to be very popular in Asia-Pacific, once they replace the US from its position. China's growth demands a concentrated effort due to the scarcity of both resources and time. The "Military-Civil Fusion" (MCF) 军民融合 is a national strategy of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Govt. worldwide pick vendors based on lowest price, so getting low-interest rates help vendors to quote lower price. Every nation is averse to lending funds for big projects or technology start-ups. Lending institutions are suffering due to bad loans. However, Chinese Govt gives away lowest interest rate loans, but they will only do so if you agree to lock every transaction for your business and your supply chain ecosystem, within China's own financial platform and buy & hire only from China. Thereby de-industrialising developed nations. This is how China is fulfilling its aspirations. Faith in personal friendships and profits rather than common sense has already led many American multinational businesses to economic disasters in China. Also, if you want to do business in China, there is to be no discussion of Chinese dominion over Tibet, Hong Kong and Taiwan. Clearly, what the Chinese are doing is 'deterrence by punishment' posturing. We need to respond to it with 'deterrence by denial'. PLA have also distinguished that the roles of military diplomacy differ in times of peace and war. China employed nearly 80 different gray zone tactics across all instruments of national power. China's information warfare and military diplomacy are mutually reinforcing and symbiotic activities. In Singapore, the CCP has sought to influence many Singaporean elites. While a war is being conducted on the battlefield, in the cognitive domain, a narrative is concurrently created to control the perception of the war. Large social media platforms have become the ‘main battleground for cognitive games and the main channel to influence people’s cognition.’ On these platforms, various short videos have become the ‘first scene’ for the public to understand various major events like a conflict or war. If one is technologically able to disrupt the adversary’s ability to communicate, it is possible to effectively suppress an adversary’s narrative. Military operations have a key supporting role to live updates on social media and allow for targeted disruption of the adversary. In fast-changing conditions, an ad hoc approach don't work. This requires a shift of gears from strategy as planning to strategy as learning. Embedding this adaptive capability is the only route to a sustainable advantage. Use the whole of government, both offensively and defensively. Intelligentized warfare utilizes emerging technologies such as AI, 5G networks and quantum computing to disrupt an adversary by attacking their ability to understand and perceive Chinese actions. Strategic cognitive overmatch (military-civil grey-zone multi-domain war) and tactical anti-satellite (space) warfare. Indian leadership may not be able to handle cognitive overload and confusing narratives, which will adversely affect at strategic level. Military dictatorships are immune to this, but democracies are highly susceptible to this type of warfare. At this level, the troops may win the battle, but the war is lost. "The enemy diversion you are ignoring is the main attack." CCP has increasingly become the greatest challenge and greatest threat to post-war international stability. International engagement and economic development have failed to soften the political character of the CCP regime. While using "Military-Civil Fusion" (MCF) 军民融合 to acquire foreign ports, China is selling an idealised-version of authoritarian governance (while in reality it's mass black bagging its citizens into remote internment camps without proper trial/defence) and preaching that 'democratic system' is a western trap to keep Asia & Africa countries weak and poor. Power is a means to achieve greater security and China is doing the work. China seeks to paralyse a bigger opponent's "systems" rather than the opponent's hard or soft deterrence capabilities. China seeks to destroy opponents but arouse minimal suspicion before the new equilibrium, to China’s advantage, is established. Chinese Communist game is to make their opponents get into self-delusion, that it's beneficial to behave, in the way China what's them to. They talk peace, however, the world can now see they are full of deception. Something said today, can change tomorrow. China does not think that this is morally bad, rather a means to achieve its aims. This is their idea of peaceful rise. Xi now no longer mentions this and instead calls on “Leading” the reform on global governance and making statements like “it is for the people of Asia to run the affairs of Asia and uphold the security of Asia”. After 2015, Xi put forward in his speeches more deceptive words, such as providing the world with a 'Chinese solution'. Zhong-guo Zhong-chandang / Communist Party of China (CPC), wants to usurp the meaning of 'democracy', by calling China a democracy! China is a Communist nation governed by one-party system, however, CPC says China is a real "democracy of both process and outcome; and both procedure and substance". In their mindset, they believe they are fully consistent & rational and convinced that other nations are delusional or failing to comprehend them. To subdue your competitor without fighting is the acme of skill. This aspect stresses the importance of shaping the conditions and to being prepared in advance. "Shaping" on the ground, means to go beyond the mode of managing differences, shape bilateral relations actively and accumulate positive momentum. Confrontation and conciliation can be used together. For example, in 2006, China reclassified the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh as part of Southern Tibet and blocked lending for development projects. China renamed six places in Arunachal, but this is nothing new and has been done by all colonizers. China also introducing stapled visas for Indian citizens of J&K. China also claims new 10% of Bhutanese land, which has no border with China. The Chinese intent is to create areas of disputes, not to go to war. China's "two steps forward, one step back" incursion to change the status-quo on the ground. Even amid its aggression, China has had no hesitation in raking up the Jammu and Kashmir issue at the UN's Security Council. Negotiation and dialogue kept the relationship from going out of control. Negotiation, as proximity and fluctuating advantage, can encourage diplomacy. As a Chinese saying goes, "Respect the strong, blackmail the weak". “We maintain, on the contrary, that war is simply a continuation of political intercourse, with the addition of other means. We deliberately use the phrase ‘with the addition of other means’ because we also want to make it clear that war in itself does not suspend political intercourse or change it into something entirely different. In essentials, that intercourse continues, irrespective of the means it employs.” Carl von Clausewitz "China seems to be most perturbed by, what it perceives as, the convergence of interest between the US and India in reorganising/realigning global supply chains. Chinese observers note how China had originally planned to use the interdependence between the Chinese and American economy to carry out the transformation/ upgradation of its manufacturing industry. While on the other hand, it simultaneously sought to exploit the vast Indian market under its Belt and Road plans to develop and industrialise (low-end industries from China’s industrially advanced provinces) its lagging inland provinces, thereby ensuring China’s economic rise to be more balanced, long-term, self-sustaining, and unbeatable. However, the script went awry midway, as the US refused to let China carry out its industrial upgradation process smoothly, and initiated “the trade and technology war”; on the other hand, India refused to cooperate and integrate the Indian economy with that of China under the BRI, RCEP or other China-led economic initiatives." "Xi Jinping thought" still reveres the teachings of Mao and Karl Marx, but it also links Mr. Xi to even older Chinese traditions. Mr. Xi regularly quotes ancient sages, stressing their teachings on obedience and order. China's Mo-Di, one of China’s first philosophers, judged all creative job's (like art, storytelling/theatre and music) as a negative utilitarianism. In ancient China, music was a trinity of arts which would be performed not simply as part of ceremonial rites, to worship ancestors and divinities, but also for entertainment at banquets to honour the powerful. In Mo-Di's view, the entire process involved in performing arts and composing music were useless, and it deprived social production of time and energy. He did not hate creative and aesthetic works, but rather saw no use for it in society, and therefore believed that people’s tax money should not go into artistic programs. He believed if someone listened to music daily, it means that they were slacking. There are only 3 things he believed that people worried about - food, clothes and rest. Xi called Karl Marx "the greatest thinker in human history." “Some people think that communism can be aspired to but never reached, or even think that it cannot be hoped for, cannot be envisioned, and is a complete illusion. . . . Facts have repeatedly told us that Marx and Engels’s analysis of the basic contradiction of capitalist society is not outdated. . . . Western anti-China forces conspire to overthrow the CCP, so the party must stamp out “false ideological trends,” including constitutional democracy, the notion that Western values are Universal, the concept of Civil Society, journalistic independence, challenges to the party’s version of history. We must not let down our guard.” He emphasized that the party's ideology and social system are fundamentally incompatible with the West. Xi said in his speech published in April 2021 the current historical period as one of great risk and opportunity. The Soviet collapse haunts CCP leadership. "The process of China's realization of the great undertaking of national rejuvenation must ultimately follow from testing and struggle against the system of American hegemony." Xi required party leaders at all levels to watch a six-part documentary titled "A 20-Year Memorial for the Soviet Loss of Party and Country." US-China conflict could be either in Pakistan or South China Sea. China has placed their bets on their alternative to Strait of Malacca, the Gwadar-Xinjiang Pipeline, as part of China's CPEC which claims to connect 30% of World's GDP to China via Pakistan's transshipment deep-sea port by 2030. However, the challenging topography of the Himalayan region and high transit costs make such investment unprofitable. Gilgit-Baltistan region, earlier known as Northern Areas, shares contiguous borders with China, Afghanistan and Kargil district of Ladakh. The Chinese-constructed Karakoram highway runs through the region. Iran’s threats to close the other major world choke point, the Strait of Hormuz, show that whatever its actions, China remains vulnerable to a Persian Gulf blockade. However, Iran would like Chinese investment and military tech. Meanwhile, Russia will continue to prove its importance through arms sales. Also, China illegally copies Russian military equipments and then cuts out Russian sales by selling it at a lower price. Russians are depended on Russia-China trade and oil sales since China's GDP is 10 time bigger than India. However, the China's per capita income is nearly one seventh that of the US. https://indusscrolls.com/during-1958-chinese-famine-people-ate-people-parents-their-kids Back in 1981, some 85% of the Chinese population was living in extreme poverty, while today it's less than 1%. (India, in contrast, still has 68% of its population living in extreme poverty.) This was because Nixon warmed up to China and gave India the cold shoulder, during the Cold War era. Deng Xiao Ping's positive attitude toward the US engagement policy was due to the fact that China's economy was at the edge of collapse at the end of the Cultural Revolution. Henry Kissinger, Alexander Haig, Prescott Bush etc persuaded American corporations to commit billions of dollars to China because they thought their connections would provide them secure deals in China. No responsible person should have advised American businessmen to commit millions of dollars to China during this period. It simply helped legitimize a repressive communist regime. If China were to achieve per capita gross national income comparable to South Korea by mid-century with a population three times larger than that of the US, then China could "become so powerful that the US will not be able to contain it and prevent it from dominating Asia." Even if China were to fall short economically, China would still likely have accumulated enough power to attempt a shot at global hegemony. There is good reason to expect that China and its armed forces will overcome the obstacles to going global. The Chinese military will need to develop a network of basing and logistical arrangements to sustain expeditionary operations. In the Indo-Pacific theater, some 40 naval bases and foreign ports support the US fleet. China's defence planners recognize that a large-scale effort is required to construct dual-use facilities along key sea lanes. They want overseas ports to refuel, repair and resupply passing Chinese combat ships and submarines; but without having to build full-fledged military-grade bases like the US. China’s strategy is evident: to confine Indian strategic attention to the Sino-Indian border, preventing New Delhi from looking beyond at Tibet and Xinjiang, China’s most sensitive pressure points. China has flooded Xinjiang and Tibet with black-suited armed militias, whose members now carry portable fire extinguishers to douse Tibetans who are attempting self-immolation. But there remains widespread resentment at Beijing’s increasingly colonial presence in these areas. In contrast, India’s border population along the LAC remains heart-warming Indian. In Ladakh, Himachal, Uttarakhand, Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh, despite New Delhi’s inexplicable neglect, pro-India sentiment is high and China is regarded with distrust and suspicion that is constantly reinforced from across the border. So far, India’s military, bureaucracy and political elite have fallen for China’s game, directing their energies into placating China in the hope of a border settlement. Since the West holds all the trump-cards, India has no other choice but to deepen economic and industrial ties with the West. While Russia had promised India that if India placed greater emphasis on the Russia-India-China (RIC) grouping, then China will be persuaded to considerably reduce its aggressive stance against India. Overall, Russia is balancing its interests between China and India and does not want to take a clear sides. However, if China is defeated in the US-China competition, Russia fear it may be US's next target. AUKUS was devised and formed as an idea of enhancing the military component when QUAD was missing a military component to deter China. The axis began with a vibrant new economic superpower (Germany then, China now) looking for more respect, territory and a "place in the sun." The 20th century axis also had a declining empire (Austria-Hungary) playing the part of the hapless sidekick during World War I, while Italy assumed that role in World War II. These days the loser sidekick is Russia, an empire no more but still eager to recapture past glories at any cost.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-16/dalio-warns-of-consequences-of-more-intense-china-us-friction Consumption by rich middle-class (who feel safe in their social security fund) led growth is the final stage in any sustainable economy. China knows its economic model is unsustainable. Wang Qishan, Xi’s vice president, once revealed that the sickness in China’s system was like a giant game of musical chairs and that state-owned enterprises couldn’t thrive in the long term. It currently has an incompatible dual-track ownership system between the market and the state. Due to rising labour costs, the industries that exports of cheap goods have moved on to Vietnam and Bangladesh. "A decade ago, the annual number of university graduates rose from 1.4 million in 2002 to 3.4 million 2005 and 6.3 million in 2010. A decade ago, the unemployment rate of university graduates was over 10%. Currently, about 54% of 18-22-year-old China's youth will obtain university degrees, and a growing percentage of them cannot find jobs that justify the effort and expense that went into obtaining a diploma. Job-seekers are cheated and exploited by corrupt employers and officials on a regular basis. Despite the booming economy, it’s still hard for many college grads to get a job." Chinese banks have huge debt due to mortgages linked to its speculative housing market. There are less infrastructure opportunities that can provide risk-free quick returns on Chinese investments. China’s energy security concerns are also about its ability to compete with other players. Despite the abundance of oil and gas in the market, the geography of China result in the possibility of “when there is competition for scarce goods… a struggle for power will ensue.” China has a high levels of national debt and an increasing social disparity between rich and poor. A potential solution to dependence on crude oil imports from the Persian Gulf would be to develop the renewable energy. Today's Chinese leadership actions are directly designed to secure the shortest sea routes to move goods to Asian markets. Although 69% of China’s energy consumption comes from coal, its oil requirements are substantial. China became the world’s largest oil importer in 2017 and 80% has to pass through the Strait of Malacca, but because of the US Navy’s heavy presence near Singapore, the Strait of Malacca would remain significantly vulnerable to a China-focused blockade. This is in stark contrast to China’s position as a net exporter in the 1970s. Chinese strategists exhibit long-standing and strong paranoia about encirclement or under siege and being cut off at sea. They view Gwadar Port in Pakistan as an “ideal anchorage” and Djibouti as an observation station and a defensive site. Given that Pakistan is currently designated a major non-NATO ally and possesses nuclear weapons, US and allies would be hard-pressed to undertake actions that directly threaten Pakistani prerogatives. Chinese authorities have also been exploring the possibility of using the Northern Sea Route (NSR) to diversify trade routes, mainly with Europe and Russia. Yet, as a result of shipping restrictions associated with the ice cover, it still cannot be an alternative. Russia aims to use its neutral position to increase its leverage over China and India, as well as Indo-Pacific affairs in general. Russia wants to formally make India part of the Eurasian Customs Union and begin laying oil and gas pipelines from Central Asia, through Aksai Chin, to India. The Chinese have been consistently and persistently moving the goalposts. China has said that they do not recognise the LAC of 1993 Jiang Zemin-Narasimha Rao agreement. The Chinese government-controlled media states that if India wants peace, India should uphold the LAC of 1959 which gives the terrain advantages to PLA and makes Indian Army's defences untenable. However, they now say that the 1959 claim line itself will only grant temporary peace and claims the entire Indian territory of Ladakh in-between Tibet and Pakistan-occupied Gilgit-baltistan. Like India, China wants to secure all land-based threats to its CPEC. China is not ready to accept that a Dalai Lama could be born outside China. China has gone further westwards with their claims made in 1962 version or those claims that were made in 1969 version. China now sees the territory of Ladakh as vital for protecting the Chinese control over Tibet and Xinjiang (Uttarakuru). Anybody thinking that a permanent solution to the China-India border issue is close at hand is being foolhardy. "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." Mao Zedong |
| |
China has steadily advance towards its declared objective of gobble-up the whole of Ladakh in due course of time. Chinese military action has been to physically hold on to new positions on the first ridge-line next to the Kugrang River near Gogra to attempt to position the PLA on dominating heights to add more depth to their bases, while the decision-makers of India are resorting to "perceptions" by creating a narrative about India building up strong defences after the damage has already been done, with nothing being done so far to undo the damage.
In fact, China has officially taken the position that they do not have any border with India in Kashmir and Ladakh! China objected to keeping open the old traditional route via Demchok in Ladakh because China consider Ladakh as its territory, far more than the 26 disputed areas near LAC. They do not accept Ladakh becoming a union Indian territory when India revoke Article 370 in J&K. However, it is important to point out as these differing "perceptions" of the LAC, do NOT exist along the Galwan River (China seems to have secured the heights in the north and south of the Galwan river).
There are 12 disputed pockets along the LAC where opinion differs in Ladakh, however, Galwan is not one of the disputed areas. We are very clear about the alignment of the LAC, as we have cremated or buried our people who were killed in action in 1962. All talk about a thick pen being used to draw lines denoting frontiers that represent an ambivalence of about 6 km is only for maps showing the McMahon Line & the Tibet-Sikkim IB, and NOT in any map showing our LAC patrolling limits. It would be a shame if we now agree to Chinese coercion and give up those areas without firing a shot, using the fig leaf of different "perceptions".
Hence, according to China's state-media, India has been forcibly building in the Chinese side. On the Chinese side, its highway G-219 can be used for a quick build-up. The terrain in Tibetan Plateau is dry, and the soil there is hard as there is no rain (due to clouds being obstructed by the Himalayan mountain range); and hence vehicles can move easily. Exactly the opposite holds true for India where, the clouds are forced to get concentrated due to the Himalayas and consequently road-building is a near impossibility. The mutual pull-back agreement by Indian Army and China's PLA, effectively shifted the LAC in Galwan Valley by 1 km in favour of the Chinese. After the Gogra disengagement, there remains the thorny issue of negotiating a troop disengagement at Depsang, where the Chinese are 15 kms inside Indian territory and have shown no inclination to discuss withdrawal. An entire Indian strike corps, along with at least two infantry divisions, have been redeployed to the LAC as a deterrent to China.
https://www.npr.org/2019/12/14/787220664/life-along-pakistans-mountain-highway-where-china-is-investing-billions-of-dolla
It is impossible to keep the existing Karakoram Highway (KKH-1) functional for 5 months a year at best because of adverse weather. A landslide and flooding (from Attabad Lake) in 2010 blocked the KKH-1 for more than one year. Eventually, a new route comprises 5 tunnels and several bridges, along the southeastern side of the Attabad Lake was added in 2015. Another all-weather alternative transportation route, Karakoram Highway (KKH-2) (and a high-speed railway line) will enter the highest mountains in PoK from the Pamir Plateau inside Xinjiang via the Mintaka Pass and then proceed into Hunza. This road will be expensive, estimated by Pakistan to cost more than US$11 billion. Hotan is an important military HQ of the PLA. The Hotan-Golmud Highway links Xinjiang and reduces the distance between Gilgit and Golmud to almost half. China has also built feeder roads eastward through the Shaksgam Valley (part of the Trans-Karakoram Tract) linking Gilgit with Hotan.
The M41 Highway that passes through the desolate Pamir Mountains is an important route along the Silk Road. This route was turned highway by the Soviets between 1931 and 1934 as a means to transport troops into Afghanistan. China has been able to legally built their second "anti-terrorist" military base in the Pamir Mountains next to the small 75-km strip called Wakhan Corridor (very near another base in Taxkorgan or Tashkurgan), after Tajikistan was unable to pay back their loans from China. Now China's is interested in the shia territory around Upper Hunza Valley (near Gilgit) to Rustam valley in Mardan (Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa) near India-controlled Kashmir. Pakistani Sunni terrorists are trying to change the demographics in that region. Currently, China and Pakistan are connected only by the Karakoram Highway, completed in 1978, via a single crossing in the Khunjerab Pass. China and Pakistan has built the nearly 3,000-km-long economic corridor linking Pakistan’s Gwadar port on the Arabian Sea through the Khunjerab Pass to west Uttarakuru (now Xinjiang) to improve connectivity between the two countries. The Indian Army believed that it was an "impossible" task to build a highway through the northernmost portion of Siachen, the Shaksgam valley, due to the tough terrain of this very narrow gorge. The satellite images have confirmed the presence of the road and military posts constructed by China using the compressed earth technique.
China never even consulted India about CPEC which passes through Pakistan-occupied Indian territory. This action is an act of war against India. China's National highway and high-speed railway is being build from Xinjiang, cutting through the Taklamakan Desert and reaching Gartok in TAR. As the defined role of the PLA is to fight in self-defence, therefore any India retaliation strike to Pakistan military in Pakistani soil that harms China's CPEC infrastructure can give China the chance to directly threaten key Indian military capabilities. However, even if the corridor to Gwadar could be developed and security issues resolved, there’s only the Karakoram Highway, an inhospitable, two-lane route through the treacherous mountains separating China and Pakistan. Contrary to the promise made by China to India in late 1962, it has been building 20 km long road in the no-man’s land since 1998. China doesn't believe in "buffer zones". During OP Vijay in the Kargil war, China used the opportunity to build in record time, a 5-km-long motorable track from finger-4 to finger-8 along the Panggong Tso lake to step up their patrolling. In 2020 skirmish have started taking place somewhere between Finger 3 and Finger 4, where the road isn't black-topped.
On June 17, 2002, both sides met again and maps of the Western sector were seen by both sides for about 20 minutes, during the meeting itself the maps were withdrawn since it was felt that they represented maximalist positions for both sides. In 2010, the denial of a visa to Lt Gen Baljit Singh Jaswal who headed the Northern Command looking after J&K, (including Ladakh) was another sign. This move was followed by China referring to J&K as a “disputed territory”. China’s true intentions would soon become clearer. The PLA was intent on establishing a foothold in PoK to control the region. China started to describe J&K as “India-controlled Kashmir”. Immediately after India repudiated Article 370, China said that India had changed the status quo in Kashmir, while adding a caveat that will not change China’s exercise of territorial sovereignty and jurisdiction beyond the 26 disputed area (near LAC) in Ladakh. China has always refused to exchange maps or inform India of its LAC perceptions. It is the Chinese claim of both the IB & LAC, that has been changing since 1950. Also, uranium deposits have been known to have been found in Ladakh in 2007.
India's Daulat Beg Oldi (DBO) the world’s highest airstrip at 16,700 feet which was constructed and in 2008. Daulat Beg Oldi is located more than 12 km south of Karakoram Pass, the north is close to China and east is Askai Chin. It's all-weather and can also facilitate an alternative west route to Siachen. If a war were to break out between India and China, Daulat Beg Oldi would be the first frontline airstrip vulnerable to Chinese artillery fire, so that IAF cannot launch air strikes against the Chinese. However, China knows that Daulat Beg Oldi is a strategic asset for India near Siachen during peace time. Hence, China seems to have secured the heights in the north and south of the Galwan river that overlook India's Daulat Beg Oldi road, with 2 battalions with 1 held as reserve at the LAC. This neutralises Daulat Beg Oldi is a strategic asset for India as China can destroy the road from those heights. Due to military storage facilities along excellent roads on the Chinese side, the PLA "Northern" rapid-force army can respond quickly. The PLA "western" army facing India in Ladakh, consist of all part-time soldiers (mainly, peasants) & are unpredictable as they have no military discipline or any knowledge about de-escalation concepts. Even back in 1962 all the PLA fighting forces in Ladakh came from Xinjiang (north) and not from Tibet (west). Interestingly, an unintended consequence of China's one-child policy has resulted in discouraging people from being in these high-risk jobs.
China wants to maintain the struggle on the ground without triggering a war. Ambiguity helps China to slowly push the envelope. The real issue is Aksai Chin can be reached from south by Hotsprings-Gogra region (which has large permanent PLA base in Kongka-'la'/pass) and from west by Daulat Beg Oldi passing through Galwan. The Chinese construction of posts in this location clearly points to China's intention of making Galwan Valley off limits to India. Chinese continue to be in Depsang at the critical Raki Nala Y-Junction (also known as Bottleneck). While the Chinese have developed infrastructure till the tail end of their perception of LAC, they resort to violence in denying the same last mile connectivity to us to our LAC. The terrain in Tibetan Plateau is dry, and the soil there is hard as there is no rain (due to clouds being obstructed by the Himalayan mountain range); and hence vehicles can move easily. Exactly the opposite holds true for India where, the clouds are forced to get concentrated due to the Himalayas and consequently road-building is a near impossibility. Hence, air transportation by both fixed-wing transport aircrafts and helicopters becomes critical for mobility. Engine's Horse-Power loses as much as 25% power due to lighter atmosphere in high-altitude.
Our own patrols must be able to move to the designated areas, as hitherto fore, without deliberate blocking by PLA. Which is why China plan was to cross the Shyok and Galwan rivers and come across the Galwan Valley, and block the Darbuk-Shayok-Daulat-Beg-Oldie Road, thereby creating pressure on India by stopping all Indian traffic movement along that road. Solace cannot be drawn from the fact that none of these incidents have led to firing, due to immense self-control and discipline. Events have a life of their own, and even limited escalation cannot be guaranteed. The trend of events indicates that prolonged face-offs were orchestrated from the apex, maybe even the CMC. These events obviously had to be carefully planned, and it takes some time to plan these things.
The M41 Highway that passes through the desolate Pamir Mountains is an important route along the Silk Road. This route was turned highway by the Soviets between 1931 and 1934 as a means to transport troops into Afghanistan. China has been able to legally built their second "anti-terrorist" military base in the Pamir Mountains next to the small 75-km strip called Wakhan Corridor (very near another base in Taxkorgan or Tashkurgan), after Tajikistan was unable to pay back their loans from China. Now China's is interested in the shia territory around Upper Hunza Valley (near Gilgit) to Rustam valley in Mardan (Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa) near India-controlled Kashmir. Pakistani Sunni terrorists are trying to change the demographics in that region. Currently, China and Pakistan are connected only by the Karakoram Highway, completed in 1978, via a single crossing in the Khunjerab Pass. China and Pakistan has built the nearly 3,000-km-long economic corridor linking Pakistan’s Gwadar port on the Arabian Sea through the Khunjerab Pass to west Uttarakuru (now Xinjiang) to improve connectivity between the two countries. The Indian Army believed that it was an "impossible" task to build a highway through the northernmost portion of Siachen, the Shaksgam valley, due to the tough terrain of this very narrow gorge. The satellite images have confirmed the presence of the road and military posts constructed by China using the compressed earth technique.
China never even consulted India about CPEC which passes through Pakistan-occupied Indian territory. This action is an act of war against India. China's National highway and high-speed railway is being build from Xinjiang, cutting through the Taklamakan Desert and reaching Gartok in TAR. As the defined role of the PLA is to fight in self-defence, therefore any India retaliation strike to Pakistan military in Pakistani soil that harms China's CPEC infrastructure can give China the chance to directly threaten key Indian military capabilities. However, even if the corridor to Gwadar could be developed and security issues resolved, there’s only the Karakoram Highway, an inhospitable, two-lane route through the treacherous mountains separating China and Pakistan. Contrary to the promise made by China to India in late 1962, it has been building 20 km long road in the no-man’s land since 1998. China doesn't believe in "buffer zones". During OP Vijay in the Kargil war, China used the opportunity to build in record time, a 5-km-long motorable track from finger-4 to finger-8 along the Panggong Tso lake to step up their patrolling. In 2020 skirmish have started taking place somewhere between Finger 3 and Finger 4, where the road isn't black-topped.
On June 17, 2002, both sides met again and maps of the Western sector were seen by both sides for about 20 minutes, during the meeting itself the maps were withdrawn since it was felt that they represented maximalist positions for both sides. In 2010, the denial of a visa to Lt Gen Baljit Singh Jaswal who headed the Northern Command looking after J&K, (including Ladakh) was another sign. This move was followed by China referring to J&K as a “disputed territory”. China’s true intentions would soon become clearer. The PLA was intent on establishing a foothold in PoK to control the region. China started to describe J&K as “India-controlled Kashmir”. Immediately after India repudiated Article 370, China said that India had changed the status quo in Kashmir, while adding a caveat that will not change China’s exercise of territorial sovereignty and jurisdiction beyond the 26 disputed area (near LAC) in Ladakh. China has always refused to exchange maps or inform India of its LAC perceptions. It is the Chinese claim of both the IB & LAC, that has been changing since 1950. Also, uranium deposits have been known to have been found in Ladakh in 2007.
India's Daulat Beg Oldi (DBO) the world’s highest airstrip at 16,700 feet which was constructed and in 2008. Daulat Beg Oldi is located more than 12 km south of Karakoram Pass, the north is close to China and east is Askai Chin. It's all-weather and can also facilitate an alternative west route to Siachen. If a war were to break out between India and China, Daulat Beg Oldi would be the first frontline airstrip vulnerable to Chinese artillery fire, so that IAF cannot launch air strikes against the Chinese. However, China knows that Daulat Beg Oldi is a strategic asset for India near Siachen during peace time. Hence, China seems to have secured the heights in the north and south of the Galwan river that overlook India's Daulat Beg Oldi road, with 2 battalions with 1 held as reserve at the LAC. This neutralises Daulat Beg Oldi is a strategic asset for India as China can destroy the road from those heights. Due to military storage facilities along excellent roads on the Chinese side, the PLA "Northern" rapid-force army can respond quickly. The PLA "western" army facing India in Ladakh, consist of all part-time soldiers (mainly, peasants) & are unpredictable as they have no military discipline or any knowledge about de-escalation concepts. Even back in 1962 all the PLA fighting forces in Ladakh came from Xinjiang (north) and not from Tibet (west). Interestingly, an unintended consequence of China's one-child policy has resulted in discouraging people from being in these high-risk jobs.
China wants to maintain the struggle on the ground without triggering a war. Ambiguity helps China to slowly push the envelope. The real issue is Aksai Chin can be reached from south by Hotsprings-Gogra region (which has large permanent PLA base in Kongka-'la'/pass) and from west by Daulat Beg Oldi passing through Galwan. The Chinese construction of posts in this location clearly points to China's intention of making Galwan Valley off limits to India. Chinese continue to be in Depsang at the critical Raki Nala Y-Junction (also known as Bottleneck). While the Chinese have developed infrastructure till the tail end of their perception of LAC, they resort to violence in denying the same last mile connectivity to us to our LAC. The terrain in Tibetan Plateau is dry, and the soil there is hard as there is no rain (due to clouds being obstructed by the Himalayan mountain range); and hence vehicles can move easily. Exactly the opposite holds true for India where, the clouds are forced to get concentrated due to the Himalayas and consequently road-building is a near impossibility. Hence, air transportation by both fixed-wing transport aircrafts and helicopters becomes critical for mobility. Engine's Horse-Power loses as much as 25% power due to lighter atmosphere in high-altitude.
Our own patrols must be able to move to the designated areas, as hitherto fore, without deliberate blocking by PLA. Which is why China plan was to cross the Shyok and Galwan rivers and come across the Galwan Valley, and block the Darbuk-Shayok-Daulat-Beg-Oldie Road, thereby creating pressure on India by stopping all Indian traffic movement along that road. Solace cannot be drawn from the fact that none of these incidents have led to firing, due to immense self-control and discipline. Events have a life of their own, and even limited escalation cannot be guaranteed. The trend of events indicates that prolonged face-offs were orchestrated from the apex, maybe even the CMC. These events obviously had to be carefully planned, and it takes some time to plan these things.
Cognitive reactive EW sensors integrates Artificial-Intelligence algorithms (without pre-programming) for quick, Adaptive communications, signal detecting, (radio fingerprints), processing and disrupting (ARC) for real-time analytics; alongside Joint multi-domains like cyber & space-based navigation networks. The electronic equipments and data storages can get outdated every 6 months, which is a challenging and expensive process. The tools available to field US commanders are insufficient to enable them to develop and plan creative operations against changing enemy EW tactics. In the not-so-distant future, AI-enabled tools will always be on, following every personnel to provide better recommendations. Russia said that "whoever becomes the leader in this sphere will become the ruler of the world."
“China is an ambitious country which envisions being unchallenged in Asia. China has managed to dominate Asia through a clever mix of diplomacy & coercion.”
Intelligentized warfare utilizes emerging technologies such as AI, 5G networks and quantum computing for fast acts to disrupt an adversary by attacking their ability to understand and perceive Chinese actions. "The future of warfare is expanding in the domains of information and intelligence. Conventional standard munitions can no longer meet the needs of warfare. Observation and perception of the battlefield situation are crucial."
"The enemy diversion you are ignoring is the main attack." While the character of war — its technical dimension changes; the nature of war as the “art of war” does not. The character and nature of war are imperfect; together, they reinforce the chaos in wars. To prevail in any strategic competition, we must quickly secure technological advantage, as well as the cognitive agility to employ it effectively.
Theater Information Advantage Detachment/Element in South China Sea, owned by US Army Cyber Command, consisting of 65 people, is specifically focused on information activities in "competition" with near-peer adversaries, or below the threshold of armed conflict. Nuclear powers can engage their competitors’ core strategic interests directly, intrusively, and coercively (and perhaps unintentionally), well below traditional forms of armed conflict, especially through cyber, economic, and media-based attacks. As states drive to compete and win at the sub-conventional level — in the "gray zone" — the risk of strategic crisis may increase. What if, by undermining and manipulating independent institutions of government and democratically-elected political leaders, during a crisis or conflict, non-democratic states can use "gray-zone" tactics to divide the public from their leaders and institutions, foment internal conflict, and impede senior decision-making.
mastering_the_gray_zone_-_understanding_a_changing_era_of_conflict.pdf | |
File Size: | 3775 kb |
File Type: |
gray_zone_tactics_and_the_principle_of_non_intervention_-_kiessling_hnsj_vol-12.pdf | |
File Size: | 512 kb |
File Type: |
China views gray zone activities as a natural extension of how countries exercise power. Grey Zone operations do not clearly violate international law, but put pressure on the adversary and test their resolve. The kill mechanism (the weapon) and the platform (the delivery system), the military's objective is either to enhance our position or degrade the position of the adversary. China employed nearly 80 different gray zone tactics across all instruments of national power. Chinese aggression and hostility towards India is in no way going to help them achieve their global aspirations. China hopes to advance its interests through coercive influence and debt-trapped proxies without clear attribution or risk of escalation. That is only helping to make their nation stand out of place and out of time. China is only upsetting its future rise by picking fights with India.
Of course, China is not stranger to information warfare and deception, or even using proxies as tools of strategic competition (nor is the US). All domains can be contested for control of resources. Over time China has coerced the Philippines, clashed with Vietnam, forced Japan to scramble its combat jets, threatened Taiwan, and found ways to alter Indian actions as well. Cold War history is littered with such cases. By promoting false narratives with conflicting data points, manipulating international institutions, and instigating targeted social unrest, potential adversaries can break confidence in the US and its allies, increase distrust and confusion, and coerce desirable outcomes at lower levels of conflict.
Of course, China is not stranger to information warfare and deception, or even using proxies as tools of strategic competition (nor is the US). All domains can be contested for control of resources. Over time China has coerced the Philippines, clashed with Vietnam, forced Japan to scramble its combat jets, threatened Taiwan, and found ways to alter Indian actions as well. Cold War history is littered with such cases. By promoting false narratives with conflicting data points, manipulating international institutions, and instigating targeted social unrest, potential adversaries can break confidence in the US and its allies, increase distrust and confusion, and coerce desirable outcomes at lower levels of conflict.
Grey-zone actions don’t just happen. They are a measured movement towards the objectives (rather than seeking decisive results within a specified time) in a carefully designed campaign plan controlled by the CCP high-level leadership and strategic-level military commanders. Grey-zone actions are not those of tactical commanders freelancing. Instead, they are carefully scripted brinkmanship. By acting to remain below key escalatory thresholds so as to avoid war, the grey zone involves the use of all the instruments of national power, particularly non-military and non-kinetic tools.
https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/server-attack-delhi-aiims-chinese-fir-2309052-2022-12-14
https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/aiims-server-hack-delhi-police-cbi-interpol-help-ip-address-details-8331538/
https://thewire.in/world/india-china-hackers-border-tension-power-grid-malware-recorded-future
https://www.forbesindia.com/article/take-one-big-story-of-the-day/cyberattacks-you-could-be-the-next-target/84223/1
https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/server-attack-delhi-aiims-chinese-fir-2309052-2022-12-14
https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/aiims-server-hack-delhi-police-cbi-interpol-help-ip-address-details-8331538/
https://thewire.in/world/india-china-hackers-border-tension-power-grid-malware-recorded-future
https://www.forbesindia.com/article/take-one-big-story-of-the-day/cyberattacks-you-could-be-the-next-target/84223/1
China is still a communist police state and India is still in coalition with other big democratic nations who have powerful economies. China has contempt for such democracies. Chinese communist leadership believe that all democracies are natural competitors for them and Indian democracy is inferior to Chinese Communist Party rule. China incorrectly believes the US has done a poor job as the policeman in keeping global Order. China willing to offer India to be a junior "partner" on the world stage and not a competitor, much in the way that the US is doing. There is a “new Cold War” with the US and Chinese officials believe it is not just prepared, but well-positioned to prevail. China hubristic assessment of its own position is encouraging even bolder acts of adventurism. There's a tendency to overestimate Chinese military capabilities. The Chinese have a long history of overestimating their capabilities in the opening stages of a war. That worked better when it was Chinese versus Chinese. There are many examples in history where militaries prepare for one kind of conflict and then had to fight a different kind of conflict because the enemy also gets a vote. Governments in the US, India, and Japan have attempted to play down their differences with China, but to no avail. China is displaying imperiousness, opportunism, reactiveness, and insecurity all at once.
The Chinese assessment is that the institutional structure in India is too process-centred to enable disruptive-innovative policies, needed to sustain decades long growth. And the political class in India does not have enough interest in taking on the challenges of the governance mechanism to cogitate solutions for the 21st century. Chinese experts agree that there is a price to pay, especially on the economic front, however, their general impression is that China can afford serious and long-term damage on its relations with India. Despite what the outsiders might see as China’s mistake, China is unlikely to change its current strategic assessment. Chinese experts agree that there is a price to pay, especially on the economic front, however, their general impression is that China can afford the damage. China is set on its new trajectory, thinking that it will pay off in the end. However, CCP also has repeatedly shown that it has the pragmatic capacity to correct course.
Indian leadership is at fault too, as it has been content with managing its diplomatic-military security issues with China, rather than address them. India has been content with ‘talk and discuss’ the boundary question and not ‘negotiate’ in any meaningful manner. Indian diplomats are stationed far away from the India-China high-altitude border. Which means no diplomat, from the Indian side, can be brought quickly, without many weeks of acclamation. The longer the talks go on, it only helps China to consolidate its hold on the land grabs, including by building fortifications and installing optic fiber cables. Indian security policy apparatus is totally devoid of any formal military representation. One-off comments are no substitute for the participative process of security policy formulation. Shivshankar Menon says that "The world is much more realistic. The world measures your material power, hard power, your economy, your military strength, and your ability to run your own affairs well."
One could argue that China has opened too many “fronts” diplomatically, but militarily, China has always been careful to avoid a two-front confrontation with America in the east and India in the west. The more China takes up its hard maximalist line vis-à-vis Indian core security interests (& territorial integrity), it's only logical that, the reaction would be that India sheds its neutral position on China and will no longer be able to justify the compartmentalization of Chinese threats to itself and have to make the difficult choice of sharing its Indian military locations and sensitive data by accepting strategic alliance with America (and will depend exclusively on US, instead of Russia, for its critical military spare-parts). Unlike Russians, US defence hardware "systems" has several strictly-controlled crypo-keys (essential for full combat operation) that can on/off by US even after it's exported/assembled by international partners. Another problem is the long time it takes to certify non-U.S. weapons for use.
The US always has its own interests in mind, which is American dominance in every region (and their maritime trade routes), and has been pushing in this direction for years. In the guise of shared India-US networks, can compromise India's missile command and control system. By being connected to the American network-centric “systems”, the effectiveness of Indian own defence can be jeopardised. After all, India has no control over American satellites or networks. One can say the entire US military power rests on its network-centric "systems" and failure to protect it puts partner nations at risk. Chinese actions on India's border has left India with no other choice but to join hands with the world's sole superpower. India will have no choice but to act as a subordinate US partner (similar to Australia & Japan) and accept that China doesn't care, if there is going to be any real peace between the two large neighbours of Asian.
China's obsession with faulty and outdated ideas carry real-world repercussions for neighbouring countries like India. For example: Chinese Han (ethnic Chinese) legendary commander Xiang Yu (of late Qin / early Han Dynasty) famously said "fawn upon one's superior and bully one's subordinates". Hard as China may try to seem like an idealised communist governance, they need to realise they are not superior to everyone, destined to become the next Huangdi Temu-jin/Genghis's empire, that stretched from Eastern and Central Europe to the Sea of Japan. Mao said that "in everything under the heaven, there is great disorder", which makes the situation excellent for the purpose of ultimately achieving a "great order under the heaven". The Chinese characters for the word 'turmoil' would translate more properly to 'chaos.'
The highest ethics for communist leadership in China is following Chinese Utilitarianism, even though they cover it up with globally acceptable diplomatic speak. China economy is many times bigger, due to the 20 times US investment every year, compared to India. However, with this economic robustness is the very basis of China’s potential as a challenger to US unipolarity. China's comprehensive national power (CNP) based on land mass, national economy and military power is second only to US. They believe a higher GDP proves that their system is ultimately superior to democracy. Hence, culturally-speaking, the Chinese Communists vision of, a "New Era" for the global community of nations, is not a "greater future for mankind" at all, but rather for China to be a strong commanding hand blessing nations that bow in respect and beats the unruly nations if they don't.
The Chinese assessment is that the institutional structure in India is too process-centred to enable disruptive-innovative policies, needed to sustain decades long growth. And the political class in India does not have enough interest in taking on the challenges of the governance mechanism to cogitate solutions for the 21st century. Chinese experts agree that there is a price to pay, especially on the economic front, however, their general impression is that China can afford serious and long-term damage on its relations with India. Despite what the outsiders might see as China’s mistake, China is unlikely to change its current strategic assessment. Chinese experts agree that there is a price to pay, especially on the economic front, however, their general impression is that China can afford the damage. China is set on its new trajectory, thinking that it will pay off in the end. However, CCP also has repeatedly shown that it has the pragmatic capacity to correct course.
Indian leadership is at fault too, as it has been content with managing its diplomatic-military security issues with China, rather than address them. India has been content with ‘talk and discuss’ the boundary question and not ‘negotiate’ in any meaningful manner. Indian diplomats are stationed far away from the India-China high-altitude border. Which means no diplomat, from the Indian side, can be brought quickly, without many weeks of acclamation. The longer the talks go on, it only helps China to consolidate its hold on the land grabs, including by building fortifications and installing optic fiber cables. Indian security policy apparatus is totally devoid of any formal military representation. One-off comments are no substitute for the participative process of security policy formulation. Shivshankar Menon says that "The world is much more realistic. The world measures your material power, hard power, your economy, your military strength, and your ability to run your own affairs well."
One could argue that China has opened too many “fronts” diplomatically, but militarily, China has always been careful to avoid a two-front confrontation with America in the east and India in the west. The more China takes up its hard maximalist line vis-à-vis Indian core security interests (& territorial integrity), it's only logical that, the reaction would be that India sheds its neutral position on China and will no longer be able to justify the compartmentalization of Chinese threats to itself and have to make the difficult choice of sharing its Indian military locations and sensitive data by accepting strategic alliance with America (and will depend exclusively on US, instead of Russia, for its critical military spare-parts). Unlike Russians, US defence hardware "systems" has several strictly-controlled crypo-keys (essential for full combat operation) that can on/off by US even after it's exported/assembled by international partners. Another problem is the long time it takes to certify non-U.S. weapons for use.
The US always has its own interests in mind, which is American dominance in every region (and their maritime trade routes), and has been pushing in this direction for years. In the guise of shared India-US networks, can compromise India's missile command and control system. By being connected to the American network-centric “systems”, the effectiveness of Indian own defence can be jeopardised. After all, India has no control over American satellites or networks. One can say the entire US military power rests on its network-centric "systems" and failure to protect it puts partner nations at risk. Chinese actions on India's border has left India with no other choice but to join hands with the world's sole superpower. India will have no choice but to act as a subordinate US partner (similar to Australia & Japan) and accept that China doesn't care, if there is going to be any real peace between the two large neighbours of Asian.
China's obsession with faulty and outdated ideas carry real-world repercussions for neighbouring countries like India. For example: Chinese Han (ethnic Chinese) legendary commander Xiang Yu (of late Qin / early Han Dynasty) famously said "fawn upon one's superior and bully one's subordinates". Hard as China may try to seem like an idealised communist governance, they need to realise they are not superior to everyone, destined to become the next Huangdi Temu-jin/Genghis's empire, that stretched from Eastern and Central Europe to the Sea of Japan. Mao said that "in everything under the heaven, there is great disorder", which makes the situation excellent for the purpose of ultimately achieving a "great order under the heaven". The Chinese characters for the word 'turmoil' would translate more properly to 'chaos.'
The highest ethics for communist leadership in China is following Chinese Utilitarianism, even though they cover it up with globally acceptable diplomatic speak. China economy is many times bigger, due to the 20 times US investment every year, compared to India. However, with this economic robustness is the very basis of China’s potential as a challenger to US unipolarity. China's comprehensive national power (CNP) based on land mass, national economy and military power is second only to US. They believe a higher GDP proves that their system is ultimately superior to democracy. Hence, culturally-speaking, the Chinese Communists vision of, a "New Era" for the global community of nations, is not a "greater future for mankind" at all, but rather for China to be a strong commanding hand blessing nations that bow in respect and beats the unruly nations if they don't.
China countered the US's lethal 'network information system-of-system' capabilities with Sunzi-style asymmetric and hybrid approach that blended confrontation with cooperation, called 'Unrestricted Warfare', which used all-effects all-domain national power. US doctrine does not recognize hybrid warfare by unarmed actors with respect to impactful information effects. This causal chain also spawns unintended consequences. It led the US to adopt the Multi-Domain Operations approach and China is attempting to counteract with Multi-Domain Precision Warfare focusing on operation of space assets for combat. CCP is focusing on exploiting what their enemies expectations are.
0 Comments
Kathmandu is the rumour capital of the World
"Ironically, during the time of Tibet’s early kings, the tables were reversed. Tibet was the empire builder. Tibetan warriors overran vast swathes of China, including its ancient capital at Xi’an, most of today’s Sinkiang, and many areas of the Himalaya south of the main watershed. To neutralize the current Chinese claim that they have always controlled Tibet, some of today's more wily commentators also like to point out that the Mongols were hardly Chinese, they were Mongol. It was with the arrival in 1644 of the Manchus, a Chinese tribe living in Manchuria, and their displacement of the Han Chinese to establish the Qing dynasty. By 1728, the Tibetans had accepted and were even welcoming these Manchu forces as a permanent deterrent against the Mongols, as well as the presence of two Manchu Residents, called Ambans, who commanded the Manchu troops. The Manchus further strengthened their hold on Tibet when they proved instrumental in repelling two invasions of Tibet by Nepal, in 1788 and 1791. They would be on hand again, in 1841, to squash Zorawar Singh’s attempted invasion from Ladakh. Tibetans indeed lapsed into a relationship with their Chinese overlords that can only be described as subservient. However, there were no treaties as such, no agreed terms to place the relationship on a legal footing. The Manchus did not even refer to Tibet as a province, which was the case for Chinese Turkestan and Taiwan. The Manchus were ousted by the revolutionary movement of Sun Yat-sen, and for the next three decades, China endured years of revolutions and civil-war. Two years after Indian Partition, in 1949, the Chinese communists under Mao Zedong ousted the Nationalist government of Chiang Kai-shek after a long and bloody civil war and established the People’s Republic of China. Almost immediately, Mao resurrected China’s expansionist ambitions, supporting the North Koreans against the south in the bloody war that would soon erupt and eyeing the vast expanse of Tibet to the west."Henry Edmundson.
There were rumours circulating amongst the British administration in Calcutta that the Chinese government had no power to stop Tibet from falling under the Russian influence, thus providing Russia with a direct route to British India, breaking the chain of quasi-autonomous buffer-states which separated India from the Russian Empire to the north. These rumours were supported by the exploration of Tibet by the first photographer of Lhasa, by Russian explorer Gombojab Tsybikov, during 1900–1901. The Dalai Lama declined to have any dealings with the British government in India, but sent his courtier Agvan Dorjiyev as emissary to the court of Czar Nicholas II with an appeal for Russian protection in 1900. Dorjiyev was warmly received both at the Peterhof, and at the Czar's palace in Yalta. These events reinforced Lord Curzon's belief that the Dalai Lama intended to place Tibet firmly within a sphere of Russian influence and end its neutrality. In 1903, Lord Curzon sent a request to the governments of China and Tibet for negotiations, to establish trade agreements. The Chinese ordered the 13th Dalai Lama to attend. However, the Dalai Lama categorically refused. Curzon concluded that China had no authority to compel the Tibetan government, and gained approval from London to send the Tibet Frontier Commission, consisting of 3,000 experienced British, Gurkhas, Pathans, Sikhs and Punjab's veterans of mountainous border warfare along with mountain artillery, engineers, machine gunners and Nepali porters. The British occupied the whole southern flank of Tibet. Tibetan responses to the invasion so far had comprised almost entirely static defences due to their rock solid faith in their defences, yet in every battle they were disappointed, primarily by their poor weaponry and inexperienced officers. A handful of their most devoted units, comprising monks, usually armed with swords, proved to be effective, but they were in too small numbers. Considerable pillaging took place at Palkor Chode, Dongtse and other monasteries after the fall of Gyantse Jong. At Lhasa, the Tibet Frontier Commission forced remaining low-level Tibetan officials to sign the Treaty of Lhasa (1904), before withdrawing to Sikkim. Treaties with Tibet place the relationship on a legal footing as desired. Captured Tibetan troops were all released without condition. The British mission departed in late September 1904, after a ceremonial presentation of gifts. Alchetron encyclopedia.
Takla, Chinese translator for Tibetan delegates, in his memoir had written that before the agreement was signed Tibetan delegates expressed desire to let the government of Tibet know its content. But the Chinese authorities, sidestepping international conventions, employed delay-tactic, and forced them to sign the agreement under pressure (Takla Phuntsok Tashi, Mi Tshe’i byung ba brJod pa Vol. II, LTWA; 1995; p. 67-68).
In one of Lhawu Tara Thupten Tendhar’s articles he had stated that apart from the 17-Point Agreement, there were two other secret appendix documents (Select Cultural and Historical Documents of Tibet, First Edition 1982; p. 109). Even in Dalai Lama’s autobiography, he had recounted having received a copy of the 17-Point Agreement and two other documents from General Chiang Chin-wu (Zhang Jinwu) when the latter arrived at Dromo / Yatung (The 14the Dalai Lama. Freedom in Exile; Hodder & Stoughton; 1990; p. 72). However, according to Goldstein on top of the publicized agreement, there were three secret appendixes. “The first dealt with the incorporation of the Tibetan army into the PLA; the second, with what would happen if the Dalai Lama decided to take refuge in India: the agreement would remain in force, and the Dalai Lama could return when he wanted to; the third, not disclosed, probably related to the gradual suppression of the Tibetan currency” (As quoted in Marie & Buffetrille edited, Authenticating Tibet; 2008; p. 66).
http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1999/china.50/50.beyond/point.counterpoint/wei.essay/
In 648, Tang Taizong sent Wang Xuance to India in response to (Buddist converted) Harshavardhana sending an ambassador to China. However, once in India, he discovered Harshavardhana had died and the new king attacked Wang and his 30 mounted subordinates. Wang escaping to Tibet and then mounting a joint of over 7,000 Nepalese mounted infantry and 1,200 Tibetan infantry and attack on the Indian state.
In 2017 the Ministry of Agriculture of Nepal released a survey document which shows China encroached on 36 hectares of Nepal’s land on the northern border. China has illegally encroached on 15 bordering districts, including Gorkha, Dolakha, Humla, Darchula, Sindhupalchowk, Rasuwa, and Sankhuwasabha. However, the common Nepalese themselves are probably unaware of the magnitude of the problem. Nepalese officials had stated that their attempts to negotiate with the Chinese side were rendered fruitless and met with hostility. The Chinese security personnel came armed with a tanker, truck and a jeep, asking the Nepalese officials to retreat to the border for talks and clarifications. Chinese Army built a veterinary centre for animal husbandry, first in 2009 and another in 2016, in two Nepal district. Recent reports have revealed that not only Nepalese farmers are facing restrictions on livestock grazing, but also the ban on ‘Hindu and Buddhist shrines’ in the border area has been imposed by China. Villages in Darchula and Gorkha have also been taken over by China, the latest example being Rui village. In September 2020, China also built 11 structures on the remote border of Nepal’s Humla district. In September 2020, there was a protest in front of the Chinese Embassy in Kathmandu regarding the illegal construction of 9-11 houses in the Humla district. The pillars of this district were found to have been demolished and moved by China. A Nepali study has made some recommendations of a strategic nature related to the status of the border pillars.
China has claimed alleged violations of Nepal’s geographical integrity by promoting the false narrative that Nepal has no territorial issues with China, but only with India. China’s incursion into Nepal ‘fits into a broader pattern of Chinese encroachment into neighbouring Bhutan's territory’. In a surprising move, for 8 days China’s State media outlet CGTN claims entire Mount Everest (China & Tibet call it Mount #Qomolangma) as the China-Nepal international border (1960 agreement) run next to it, but Nepal Communist Party govt is busy attacking India over the new 80-km-long Dharchula-Lipulekh strategically crucial road link, which was made so that Indian army can access 4 km away from the India-China boundary. Nepal doesn’t face any threat of violent aggression from India, while the tiny road is strategically crucial for India, which faces the threat of Chinese aggression as is visible from the face-off between the Indian Army and PLA Army troops in Sikkim’s Naku La sector. Nepal also came out with a new map showing highly strategic areas of Lipulekh, Limpiyadhura and Kalapani as its territories. However, the Indian troops have been deployed there since India fought a war with China in 1962. Nepali political leaders to keep in mind India’s national security considerations with regard to China. India reacted sharply and called Nepal's move a "unilateral act" and cautioned Kathmandu that such "artificial enlargement" of territorial claims will not be acceptable. The timing of the Nepali moves on its border with India was a matter of security for India.
British India and Nepal fought a war in 1814, the Nepalis were sent back across the Kali River in May 1815 and subsequently the Segowli Treaty was signed on March 4, 1816. Article 5 of the Treaty stated: “The Rajah of Nepaul renounces for himself, his heirs and successors, all claim to or connexion with the countries lying to the West of the River Kali, and engages never to have any concern with those countries or the inhabitants thereof.” Buddhi Narayan Shrestha, the former Director General of the Land Survey Department, said the ‘Kali River’ is in fact the Kuthi Yankti river that arises below the Limpiyadhura range and not the one earlier accepted by India, China and Nepal. It is how Nepal began claiming an entire area of Kumaon up to the Kuthi Valley, some 400 km2 in total. Unfortunately, on May 20, 2020, Nepal for the first time released a map that incorporating the Maoist claims; it showed the entire area to the east of Kuthi Yankti river as part of their territory. The Indian map is exactly the same than the one published in 1954. India has said unilateral decisions on border issues won’t be accepted. Nepal seems to have forgotten that the Nepal-China Boundary Treaty, signed by President Liu Shaoqi of China and King Mahendra of Nepal in 1961 also shows the Kali river as per the Indian stand. Article I (1) defined the China-Nepal boundary line, which “starts from the point where the watershed between the Kali River and the Tinkar River meets the watershed between the tributaries of the Mapchu (Karnali) River on the one hand and the Tinkar River on the other hand…”. The watershed principle as well as the land revenues of Gunji village on the Indian side.
In 2017 the Ministry of Agriculture of Nepal released a survey document which shows China encroached on 36 hectares of Nepal’s land on the northern border. China has illegally encroached on 15 bordering districts, including Gorkha, Dolakha, Humla, Darchula, Sindhupalchowk, Rasuwa, and Sankhuwasabha. However, the common Nepalese themselves are probably unaware of the magnitude of the problem. Nepalese officials had stated that their attempts to negotiate with the Chinese side were rendered fruitless and met with hostility. The Chinese security personnel came armed with a tanker, truck and a jeep, asking the Nepalese officials to retreat to the border for talks and clarifications. Chinese Army built a veterinary centre for animal husbandry, first in 2009 and another in 2016, in two Nepal district. Recent reports have revealed that not only Nepalese farmers are facing restrictions on livestock grazing, but also the ban on ‘Hindu and Buddhist shrines’ in the border area has been imposed by China. Villages in Darchula and Gorkha have also been taken over by China, the latest example being Rui village. In September 2020, China also built 11 structures on the remote border of Nepal’s Humla district. In September 2020, there was a protest in front of the Chinese Embassy in Kathmandu regarding the illegal construction of 9-11 houses in the Humla district. The pillars of this district were found to have been demolished and moved by China. A Nepali study has made some recommendations of a strategic nature related to the status of the border pillars.
China has claimed alleged violations of Nepal’s geographical integrity by promoting the false narrative that Nepal has no territorial issues with China, but only with India. China’s incursion into Nepal ‘fits into a broader pattern of Chinese encroachment into neighbouring Bhutan's territory’. In a surprising move, for 8 days China’s State media outlet CGTN claims entire Mount Everest (China & Tibet call it Mount #Qomolangma) as the China-Nepal international border (1960 agreement) run next to it, but Nepal Communist Party govt is busy attacking India over the new 80-km-long Dharchula-Lipulekh strategically crucial road link, which was made so that Indian army can access 4 km away from the India-China boundary. Nepal doesn’t face any threat of violent aggression from India, while the tiny road is strategically crucial for India, which faces the threat of Chinese aggression as is visible from the face-off between the Indian Army and PLA Army troops in Sikkim’s Naku La sector. Nepal also came out with a new map showing highly strategic areas of Lipulekh, Limpiyadhura and Kalapani as its territories. However, the Indian troops have been deployed there since India fought a war with China in 1962. Nepali political leaders to keep in mind India’s national security considerations with regard to China. India reacted sharply and called Nepal's move a "unilateral act" and cautioned Kathmandu that such "artificial enlargement" of territorial claims will not be acceptable. The timing of the Nepali moves on its border with India was a matter of security for India.
British India and Nepal fought a war in 1814, the Nepalis were sent back across the Kali River in May 1815 and subsequently the Segowli Treaty was signed on March 4, 1816. Article 5 of the Treaty stated: “The Rajah of Nepaul renounces for himself, his heirs and successors, all claim to or connexion with the countries lying to the West of the River Kali, and engages never to have any concern with those countries or the inhabitants thereof.” Buddhi Narayan Shrestha, the former Director General of the Land Survey Department, said the ‘Kali River’ is in fact the Kuthi Yankti river that arises below the Limpiyadhura range and not the one earlier accepted by India, China and Nepal. It is how Nepal began claiming an entire area of Kumaon up to the Kuthi Valley, some 400 km2 in total. Unfortunately, on May 20, 2020, Nepal for the first time released a map that incorporating the Maoist claims; it showed the entire area to the east of Kuthi Yankti river as part of their territory. The Indian map is exactly the same than the one published in 1954. India has said unilateral decisions on border issues won’t be accepted. Nepal seems to have forgotten that the Nepal-China Boundary Treaty, signed by President Liu Shaoqi of China and King Mahendra of Nepal in 1961 also shows the Kali river as per the Indian stand. Article I (1) defined the China-Nepal boundary line, which “starts from the point where the watershed between the Kali River and the Tinkar River meets the watershed between the tributaries of the Mapchu (Karnali) River on the one hand and the Tinkar River on the other hand…”. The watershed principle as well as the land revenues of Gunji village on the Indian side.
Sydney Wignall worked for the Indian Military Intelligence. In 1955, led the first Welsh Himalayan Expedition with the intention of climbing Gurla Mandhata, at 25,355ft, a peak dominating the Manasarovar and Rakshastal lakes, not far from Mount Kailash, near the tri-junction between Chinese-occupied Tibet, Nepal and India. There were no sophisticated satellites able to follow the movement of vehicles in these remote areas; ‘human intelligence’ was still the prime source of information. Sydney Wignall witness the existence of Chinese motorable road building activities in Tibet towards Xinjiang.
On 6 October 1957, the Sinkiang-Tibet road was formally opened with a ceremony in Gartok and 12 trucks on a trial run from Yarkand reached Gartok. Unfortunately, Wignall and his companions were captured by the Chinese Army, soon after. It is from General Zhang that Wignall heard that China claimed Aksai Chin, NEFA, as well as parts of Nepal, Sikkim and Bhutan. Communist Chinese dream is to unite the five fingers with the mainland. Wignall was later released in the midst of winter in a high altitude pass. The Chinese thought he would never survive the blizzard or find his way back to India. The Official Report of 1962 War prepared by the Ministry of Defence mentions the famous road.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJdIA6OLyHU&t=24s
Nepal Communist League overthrew monarchy and fought from 1996 to 2006.
Nepal's Maoists have been considered as a terrorist organization by the United States. When you see the Indian Ocean region, India & Sri Lanka has a very important place, our geographical location is very important. Indian Ocean is interest for China since natural resources such as oil and minerals coming to China are far away and therefore hydrographic survey vessel are being used to map funds and collect data necessary for the navigation of submarines such as salinity and water temperature. Bangladesh joined the BRI in 2016. China’s main interests in Bangladesh are not roads but access to its strategically located ports – Chittagong and Mongla – on the Bay of Bengal. Since then, China has also established itself as the largest trading partner of Bangladesh. Its investments amount to around $26 billion. Trade between China and Bangladesh amounted to about $18 billion. Total Indian investment in Bangladesh is currently around $3 billion. Trade between India and Bangladesh amounted to about $10 billion. America is the storehouse of world-class technology. Military sales has long been a US diplomatic mainstay. There is no country that beats America on this high-end cutting edge technology. One of the problems is the cost. Also, you see their track record-that track record. America would not give its cutting-edge technology to any country, not even to its NATO allies, forget about India. We are not even in an alliance with the Americans. We only have a partnership. As I said, America invests a lot of money in its technology; America is not a country that will give its technology to any country. Full ToT technologies will not be given to anyone in the world. So basically, it is a wild goose chase. When I see the track record, I admire America and American technology, but I am convinced that they will not part with any high-end technology for use in joint ventures. India still sees America as less reliable than other countries such as Russia, Israel, and France on matters related to defence procurement, despite being the go-to nation for world-class and cutting edge defence technology. India should not forget that when India’s Ballistic Missile Defence Programme conceptual stage, Americans had blocked the sale of Arrow 2 ABM. US Policymakers should understand that U.S. need to boost India (we have a very huge military) as a counter to China and that we can’t let India’s relationship with Russia get in the way, rather than outmanoeuvred India to push for US personnel and surveillance hardware being stationed for long duration on Sri Lankan soil.
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/cpn-maoist-bans-hindi-films-indian-vehicles-in-10-districts/articleshow/16556905.cms
- United Left Front (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist.Centre)
- Samyukta Samabeshi JanaMorcha/Left Front
- Workers & Peasants or Majdoor Kisan
Nepal's Maoists have been considered as a terrorist organization by the United States. When you see the Indian Ocean region, India & Sri Lanka has a very important place, our geographical location is very important. Indian Ocean is interest for China since natural resources such as oil and minerals coming to China are far away and therefore hydrographic survey vessel are being used to map funds and collect data necessary for the navigation of submarines such as salinity and water temperature. Bangladesh joined the BRI in 2016. China’s main interests in Bangladesh are not roads but access to its strategically located ports – Chittagong and Mongla – on the Bay of Bengal. Since then, China has also established itself as the largest trading partner of Bangladesh. Its investments amount to around $26 billion. Trade between China and Bangladesh amounted to about $18 billion. Total Indian investment in Bangladesh is currently around $3 billion. Trade between India and Bangladesh amounted to about $10 billion. America is the storehouse of world-class technology. Military sales has long been a US diplomatic mainstay. There is no country that beats America on this high-end cutting edge technology. One of the problems is the cost. Also, you see their track record-that track record. America would not give its cutting-edge technology to any country, not even to its NATO allies, forget about India. We are not even in an alliance with the Americans. We only have a partnership. As I said, America invests a lot of money in its technology; America is not a country that will give its technology to any country. Full ToT technologies will not be given to anyone in the world. So basically, it is a wild goose chase. When I see the track record, I admire America and American technology, but I am convinced that they will not part with any high-end technology for use in joint ventures. India still sees America as less reliable than other countries such as Russia, Israel, and France on matters related to defence procurement, despite being the go-to nation for world-class and cutting edge defence technology. India should not forget that when India’s Ballistic Missile Defence Programme conceptual stage, Americans had blocked the sale of Arrow 2 ABM. US Policymakers should understand that U.S. need to boost India (we have a very huge military) as a counter to China and that we can’t let India’s relationship with Russia get in the way, rather than outmanoeuvred India to push for US personnel and surveillance hardware being stationed for long duration on Sri Lankan soil.
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/cpn-maoist-bans-hindi-films-indian-vehicles-in-10-districts/articleshow/16556905.cms
Nepal has now become a major source of Indo-Chinese geo-political rivalry and a source of deep strategic vulnerability for India. Democracies are however notoriously unstable to begin with and need patience and commitment all round. Communist Party CPN-Maoist, supported by China, have captured the majority of seats in Nepal's election. Even the borders of Nepal are looked after by China. According to a confidential document published by WikiLeaks in 2010, China would reward Nepali forces if they handed over Tibetans fleeing across the border. The price is paid by following the line of the Communist Party’s propaganda. For example, China is spending a lot on the propaganda that Lord Ram and Lord Buddha were Nepali, which is untrue. Some private schools in Nepal have reportedly agreed to make Mandarin a compulsory subject in classes in return for China footing the salary for the in return for China footing the salary for the language teacher. India seems to have lost a neutral neighbour. However, geography is in India’s favour. Only national interests dictate good relations between two nations.
The Nepalese capital was a fertile recruiting ground of Tibetians. First, Nepal was the only nation still allowed to maintain a Trade Mission and Consulate General in Lhasa. Second, there was a substantial community of ethnic Tibetans who had opted for Nepalese citizenship after 1959, and China had decreed that these Nepalese passport holders were allowed to visit their families or conduct business in Tibet once a year. by 2008, China completely sealed the Sino-Nepal and Indo-Tibetan borders.
China’s main security concern relates to anti-China activities by 20,000 Tibetans living in Nepal who are virtually under lockdown during such visits. Nepal decided to shelve the treaty and a few other proposals, particularly to build border roads, at the last minute. Nepal dropped some of its plans "following apprehensions they could infringe on its sovereignty", according to a financial daily. Instead of the extradition treaty, a milder pact on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters was signed, it added. There were apparently apprehensions "in sections of the Nepalese government that the extradition treaty will be used to clamp down against Tibetans and deportation of Tibetans to China," according to the newspaper.
President Xi was furious; he warned that those not respecting the 'One China' policy would be crushed. According to Chinese state media, Xi told the Nepali PM during his stay in Kathmandu: "Anyone attempting to split China in any part of the country will end in crushed bodies and shattered bones. And any external forces backing such attempts at dividing China will be deemed by the Chinese people as pipe-dreaming."
China’s main security concern relates to anti-China activities by 20,000 Tibetans living in Nepal who are virtually under lockdown during such visits. Nepal decided to shelve the treaty and a few other proposals, particularly to build border roads, at the last minute. Nepal dropped some of its plans "following apprehensions they could infringe on its sovereignty", according to a financial daily. Instead of the extradition treaty, a milder pact on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters was signed, it added. There were apparently apprehensions "in sections of the Nepalese government that the extradition treaty will be used to clamp down against Tibetans and deportation of Tibetans to China," according to the newspaper.
President Xi was furious; he warned that those not respecting the 'One China' policy would be crushed. According to Chinese state media, Xi told the Nepali PM during his stay in Kathmandu: "Anyone attempting to split China in any part of the country will end in crushed bodies and shattered bones. And any external forces backing such attempts at dividing China will be deemed by the Chinese people as pipe-dreaming."
2021-pal_china_and_south_asia.pdf | |
File Size: | 6552 kb |
File Type: |
The "Military-Civil Fusion" (MCF) 军民融合 is a national strategy of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Communist China's "ancient" or "lost" or "stolen" territory scam can't mask or excuse its calculated imperialism. In the late 18th century, European empires sought colonies. Colonies gave the imperial powers natural resources, markets for economic dominance, and often strategic military bases. Chinese workers have built substandard infrastructure, such as a cracking dam in Ecuador and faltering railroads in Ethiopia and Djibouti, indebting themselves to China for decades.
Govt. worldwide pick vendors based on lowest price, so getting low interest rates help vendors to quote lower price. Every nation is averse to lending funds for big projects or technology start-ups. Lending institutions are suffering due to bad loans. However, Chinese Govt gives the lowest interest rate loans, but they will only do so if you agree to lock every transactions for your business and your supply chain ecosystem, within their own financial platform and buy & hire only from China. "China seems to be stingy in extending time and reducing interest rates on loans".
Infrastructure projects are mushrooming. China emphasised that the cross-himalayan Lhasa to Kathmandu rail connectivity network will help Nepal become land-linked from land-locked. However, a costly railway line from Lhasa to Kathmandu, unless it reaches the border with India, makes little commercial sense. How the Kathmandu-Kyirong rail will connect with the India, given the different railway gauges, is also unclear. One way-trade seems to be the BRI norm. Sri Lanka could not pay back their debt, china control over their deep-sea port (currently, non-military, but it was made to be repurposed into deep port for subs). This transfer was part of a debt swap totalling USD 1.2 billion. When Tajikistan could not pay back their debt, china have built bases in tajikistan-china border, near wakhan corridor on afghanistan-pakistan border.
The issue is the cost of cargo between Kolkata and Kathmandu is three times compared to the cost of cargo between Hamburg (in Germany) and Kolkata. China, which currently accounts for just 13% of Nepal’s imports mainly because connectivity is hindered by the Himalayas, has been amping up its operations in the region. China has been investing heavily in Nepal, as Beijing has pledged $8.3 billion to build roads and hydropower plants in Nepal. With 90% FDI and BRI projects into Nepal, Beijing is doing with Nepal what it does in Pakistan or any other country with significant investments, despite the fact that Nepal’s largest trading partner is India.
Many nations including Djibouti, Tonga, the Maldives, the Republic of Congo, Kyrgyzstan, Cambodia, Niger, Laos, Zambia, Samoa, Vanuatu, and Mongolia now have debts to China at more than 20% of their GDP. As a result, many of these nations have had to hand over ownership of several investments, and swathes of sovereign territory to the Chinese government. Djibouti, heavily indebted to China, offered Beijing a military base, China's first outside its borders. “Only A Drunkard Would Accept These Terms”, Tanzania President rejected China’s killer loans & has initiated a renegotiation process by pressing the investors to bring down the lease period to 33 years from 99 years. In 2018, Zambia lost the Kenneth Kaunda International Airport to China over debt repayment.
Currently, Kenyan government risks losing the lucrative Mombasa port to China should the country fail to repay huge loans advanced by Chinese lenders. It is a strategic foothold along a critical commercial and military waterway. Built at a cost of US$3,6 billion and connecting the Indian Ocean city of Mombasa with Nairobi's capital, SGR is the most expensive infrastructure project since Kenya's independence in 1963. China Exim Bank would become a principle in KPA if Kenya Railways Corporation (KRC) defaults in its obligations. The Inland Container Depot in Nairobi is also at stake, which receives and dispatches freight hauled on the new cargo trains from the seaport. A takeover would also mean thousands of port workers who would be forced to work under the Chinese lenders. Kenya public debt is estimated to be over $49,65 billion, which is more than 56% of its GDP.
“We have seen projects which are commercially unsustainable. Airports where aircraft don’t come. Harbours where a ship doesn’t come. So, I think people would be justified in asking themselves — what am I getting into? And, it is obviously in the interest of the country concerned, but it is also in the interest of the international community because bad, unsustainable projects don’t end there… debt becomes equity, and that becomes something else. So there are real concerns out there. So I think it is very important that all of us make informed decisions, but of course, very competitive decisions,”
China and Nepal have a direct internet connection now, which means that Nepal no longer has to be dependent on India for the internet. China has installed its Huawei 5G network tower on the highest peak in the world to snoop in India, Bangladesh and Myanmar, and China doesn’t even recognise the fact that it shares the peak with Nepal. When China is consolidating its claims, Nepal govt. has deafening silence towards Chinese expansionism. Clearly, China is exercising more influence over how Nepal prioritises its territorial disputes than Nepal itself. This is a common non-contact war communist strategy to try to misdirect cultural ties, in order to convince them to lose any trust they have built with each other, so that the social unity becomes weak (divide and rule).
https://apnews.com/article/china-debt-banking-loans-financial-developing-countries-collapse-8df6f9fac3e1e758d0e6d8d5dfbd3ed6
Infrastructure projects are mushrooming. China emphasised that the cross-himalayan Lhasa to Kathmandu rail connectivity network will help Nepal become land-linked from land-locked. However, a costly railway line from Lhasa to Kathmandu, unless it reaches the border with India, makes little commercial sense. How the Kathmandu-Kyirong rail will connect with the India, given the different railway gauges, is also unclear. One way-trade seems to be the BRI norm. Sri Lanka could not pay back their debt, china control over their deep-sea port (currently, non-military, but it was made to be repurposed into deep port for subs). This transfer was part of a debt swap totalling USD 1.2 billion. When Tajikistan could not pay back their debt, china have built bases in tajikistan-china border, near wakhan corridor on afghanistan-pakistan border.
The issue is the cost of cargo between Kolkata and Kathmandu is three times compared to the cost of cargo between Hamburg (in Germany) and Kolkata. China, which currently accounts for just 13% of Nepal’s imports mainly because connectivity is hindered by the Himalayas, has been amping up its operations in the region. China has been investing heavily in Nepal, as Beijing has pledged $8.3 billion to build roads and hydropower plants in Nepal. With 90% FDI and BRI projects into Nepal, Beijing is doing with Nepal what it does in Pakistan or any other country with significant investments, despite the fact that Nepal’s largest trading partner is India.
Many nations including Djibouti, Tonga, the Maldives, the Republic of Congo, Kyrgyzstan, Cambodia, Niger, Laos, Zambia, Samoa, Vanuatu, and Mongolia now have debts to China at more than 20% of their GDP. As a result, many of these nations have had to hand over ownership of several investments, and swathes of sovereign territory to the Chinese government. Djibouti, heavily indebted to China, offered Beijing a military base, China's first outside its borders. “Only A Drunkard Would Accept These Terms”, Tanzania President rejected China’s killer loans & has initiated a renegotiation process by pressing the investors to bring down the lease period to 33 years from 99 years. In 2018, Zambia lost the Kenneth Kaunda International Airport to China over debt repayment.
Currently, Kenyan government risks losing the lucrative Mombasa port to China should the country fail to repay huge loans advanced by Chinese lenders. It is a strategic foothold along a critical commercial and military waterway. Built at a cost of US$3,6 billion and connecting the Indian Ocean city of Mombasa with Nairobi's capital, SGR is the most expensive infrastructure project since Kenya's independence in 1963. China Exim Bank would become a principle in KPA if Kenya Railways Corporation (KRC) defaults in its obligations. The Inland Container Depot in Nairobi is also at stake, which receives and dispatches freight hauled on the new cargo trains from the seaport. A takeover would also mean thousands of port workers who would be forced to work under the Chinese lenders. Kenya public debt is estimated to be over $49,65 billion, which is more than 56% of its GDP.
“We have seen projects which are commercially unsustainable. Airports where aircraft don’t come. Harbours where a ship doesn’t come. So, I think people would be justified in asking themselves — what am I getting into? And, it is obviously in the interest of the country concerned, but it is also in the interest of the international community because bad, unsustainable projects don’t end there… debt becomes equity, and that becomes something else. So there are real concerns out there. So I think it is very important that all of us make informed decisions, but of course, very competitive decisions,”
China and Nepal have a direct internet connection now, which means that Nepal no longer has to be dependent on India for the internet. China has installed its Huawei 5G network tower on the highest peak in the world to snoop in India, Bangladesh and Myanmar, and China doesn’t even recognise the fact that it shares the peak with Nepal. When China is consolidating its claims, Nepal govt. has deafening silence towards Chinese expansionism. Clearly, China is exercising more influence over how Nepal prioritises its territorial disputes than Nepal itself. This is a common non-contact war communist strategy to try to misdirect cultural ties, in order to convince them to lose any trust they have built with each other, so that the social unity becomes weak (divide and rule).
https://apnews.com/article/china-debt-banking-loans-financial-developing-countries-collapse-8df6f9fac3e1e758d0e6d8d5dfbd3ed6
“Initially, the Red Army Generals were all sweet and honey towards the Tibetans. The Chinese Generals handled the Tibetans delicately and with patience, trying to get them gradually into their fold, trying to win their hearts and minds. It was subtle and hardly visible, and the largesse that poured in was phenomenal…”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmnBf0pwXGI
Communist
MLM Communist Alliance (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist), split into two main groups:-
- Unified Communist (UCPN Maoist) formed by:-
Communist (CPN Maoist) supported by China with Chitra Bahadur Ale-group, and
JanaMorcha or Left Front.
Samyukta Samabeshi JanaMorcha the legal mainstream of underground Communist (Unity Centre), and
Rastriya JanaMorcha was formerly called, Chitra Bahadur KC-group, the legal mainstream of underground Communist (Masal). The small party called NSP (Malema) or Samyabadi, earlier known as Sadbhawana (Anandidevi), had merged into Rastriya JanaMorcha. - Communist (Marxist-Leninist) former an underground Revolutionary Coordination Committee Jhapa District & Morang) formed by:-
Mukti Morcha Samuha,
Communist (Pushpa Lal) and
Communist (Manmohan)
- Communist (United Marxist) includes Communist (United) and Communist (Marxist). The students wing of the party was called Nepal Progressive Students Union and its trade union was the Nepal Trade Union Centre (NTUC). They have been expelled from original UML Communist (United Marxist-Leninist)
Socialist
- Janata Samajwadi Party, formed in 2020 after the unification of Rastriya Janata Party Nepal (RJPN) and Samajbadi / Socialist Party (Naya Shakti)
- Federal Socialist Forum Nepal (FSFN)
- Nepali Congress (NC)
- Nepali Congress (Democratic)
- Bibeksheel (&) Sajha
- Jana Jagaran
- Workers & Peasants or Majdoor Kisan
Nepal’s unique relationship with India was formalised when Nepal and Britain signed an agreement of friendship in 1923. After India became independent, the traditional close and friendly relations between the two countries with open borders have continued. Independent India avowed its friendly relations with Nepal with the signing of the India-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship (INTPF) in 1950.
These treaties opened up opportunities for Nepalese citizens to travel, study, and do business freely in India. The extension of non-reciprocal duty free access for Nepalese goods to Indian markets has huge potential as Nepal develops further. Though Nepal largely gained from this arrangement, over dependence upon India has created an anti-India backlash. Under the INTPF, Nepal agreed to depend upon India for security, as well as seek Indian consent to import arms, ammunition and military equipment from other countries. As Nepal gained greater international exposure, these were seen as signs of Indian domination. As a result Nepal has stopped adhering to such stipulations. Many saw the India-assisted development projects as more beneficial to India than Nepal. On trade and transit issues also there had been the strong differences between the two countries as land-locked Nepal was keen to diversify its trade access to other countries over riding Indian concerns.
For most of the twentieth century, Nepal was ruled by the Ranas, a hereditary family of prime ministers who had displaced the Shah dynasty as the real rulers of the country. Then, in the early 1950s, after India gained its independence, King Tribhuvan, with the support of the new democratic Indian government, overthrew the decadent Rana rule and initiated the modern political history of Nepal.
King Tribhuvan and his son, King Mahendra, ruled directly throughout most of the 1950s, except during a brief period of multiparty democracy late in the decade, after which King Mahendra dissolved the elected Congress Party government. In 1962, King Mahendra issued a more royalist constitution establishing a new political structure known as the "Party-less Panchayat" system. This single-party rule banned all political parties and created village, district and national level councils, or panchayats, by which the king could rule without significant opposition.
Although effective at limiting dissent and organized political parties, over the decades, the panchayat government failed to serve the population. It evidenced little interest in addressing the country's systemic problems of social inequality and severe economic underdevelopment.
In 1990, yielding to a variety of political pressures, the panchayat system collapsed and a new multi-party democracy was established under the aegis of a new constitution. This brief period of political liberalization did not last. The new political system, formally a Constitutional Monarchy, was ill-served by many of the political leaders, who fought over power, leading to a new government almost every year from 1990 to 2002. These democratic governments were generally viewed as being extremely corrupt, self-serving and dominated by the same elites as the previous system.
Although the period of parliamentary democracy was unstable, it fostered a rapid increase in civil society organizations that had been banned under the panchayat, including political parties, nongovernmental organizations, human rights agencies, newspapers, magazines and other professional organizations.
In 1994, the United People's Front, a political alliance of several Nepalese leftist parties, split apart. One of its former leaders, Pushpa Kamal Dahal (commonly known as Comrade Prachanda), founded the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoists (CPN-Maoists, or Maoists), a radical splinter group of the Communist Party of Nepal (CPN). The Maoists claim to be inspired by the revolutionary philosophy of Mao Tsetung. However, China disavows any connection between the Maoists and traditional Maoist doctrines of the modern state of China. The Maoists' model is ideologically similar to Peru's Shining Path movement, claiming to be a voice of the poor and to use violence as a means to fight state oppression and police brutality.
On February 13, 1996, citing the government's failure to respond to a memorandum outlining its demands-such as the abolition of royal privileges, the creation of a new constitution and renegotiation of the border with India-the Maoists officially launched their insurgency, the "People's War." The stated intention of the "People's War" is to overthrow the constitutional monarchy and to establish a republic through a constituent assembly.
The Maoists enjoyed some popular support for their cause. This was particularly true among the lesser-educated rural population, many of whom had had very little contact with the government other than through the police and a very poor health and education system at the village level. Over time, however, the Maoists' increased use of violence, intimidation and brutality has alienated many former supporters.
Maoist movement began in the mid-western region, targeting so-called "enemies of the people," such as police, landowners, members of the political parties, teachers, local government officials and others. From the outset, the Maoists have targeted the national infrastructure as a means of destabilizing the country. This has included attacks on airports, bridges, power plants and telecommunications systems, as well as forced "donations" from businesses, organizations and individuals to support their cause. They also carry out general strikes, bandhs, which disrupt trade and transport and cause shortages in food and other essential items by temporarily shutting down major highways, government buildings and schools. Maoist intimidation and harassment of international development agencies to provide forced "donations" has been ongoing for several years, reaching new heights in 2004. The Maoists are also responsible for a range of other egregious abuses against children, as well as adults, such as torture and unlawful killings. In a late 2003 Washington Times article, Maoist Chairman Prachanda claimed that the Maoists control up to 80 percent of Nepalese territory.
Unfortunately, in most rural areas, outside of the district centers, the system of elected local governments, known as Village Development Committees (VDCs), is no longer functioning due to earlier political decisions made in Kathmandu to dissolve local governments. In some cases the VDCs have been replaced by a parallel Maoist "people's government" (jan sarkhar) structure.
The Maoists are generally believed to comprise 3,000 to 4,000 regular troops and an estimated 10,000 to 15,000 local militia members, according to the Small Arms Survey 2003. However, one estimate printed in the New York Times in 2003, even before the escalation of the situation in 2004, placed these numbers as high as 8,000 regular troops and 40,000 irregular fighters.
On November 26, 2001, the government declared a state of emergency in response to the breakdown of the first cease-fire and the first Maoist attack on the RNA. At that time, the government officially authorized the RNA to "disarm" the Maoists. With this declaration, the government also suspended several articles of Nepal's constitution, including those relating to rights of freedom of thought and expression; rights of assembly and movement; the right not to be held in preventive detention without sufficient grounds; and the rights to information, property, privacy and judicial remedy, according to Amnesty International (AI). The government allowed the state of emergency to lapse in August 2002.
Over the years, the government's counterinsurgency has taken many forms, including roadblocks, security checks and blockades of food supplies and shipments of essential goods, all of which have had serious ramifications for daily life in Nepal. In this context, the government is also responsible for a range of egregious child rights abuses, such as unlawful killing, torture, forced disappearance and rape.
Political disagreements have also ensued within the government itself, such as a major disagreement over the proposed extension of the state of emergency in 2002. As a result, the government has suffered several major political upheavals in recent years, including dissolution of the Parliament by Prime Minister Deuba in May of 2002, followed by the dismissal of Prime Minister Deuba by King Gyanendra in October of 2002 on charges of "incompetence" and the indefinite postponement of elections.
Between 2002 and 2004, the king appointed two former panchayat politicians as prime minister, but both governments eventually collapsed. Ironically, in June 2004, King Gyanendra re-appointed Prime Minister Deuba to his position, with the support of other political parties and the stated agenda of restarting peace talks with the Maoists and ensuring elections to take place within a year.
Cease-Fires: Two rounds of negotiations were conducted between the government and the Maoists in 2001 and 2003. In both instances, the Maoist demands included the establishment of a constitutional assembly and a new constitution, while the government protected its interest in sustaining the monarchy and argued that it cannot hold parliamentary elections as violence continues.
What the myth-makers of Kathmandu failed to understand was that the Nepali polity was comprehensively anachronistic, based on a narrow system of accommodation of the urban and rural elites, and unable to deliver even the most rudimentary form of welfare to the vast majority of impoverished rural Nepalis. Left to fend for themselves after a series of betrayals that saw people being deprived of the agrarian livelihood thanks to World Bank-International Monetary Fund reforms, deprived of the water and natural resources thanks to Asian Development Bank-led developmental destruction, denied even basic services such as electricity and a decent education, ordinary Nepalis voted in large numbers for a political force that had articulated a new radicalism in Nepali history and underwent severe hardships to give a voice to peoples' aspirations in the course of the 10-year old civil war.
The mainstream political parties were themselves unable to overcome their ideological paralysis and formulate a clear vision of their politics that would at least have neutralised the loss of credibility that resulted from their craven conduct during the years that they managed the polity between 1991 and 2004. They were unable even to take a definite and categorical position on the question of monarchy and the army, both of which had caused immense damage to rural Nepal through their depredations.
In short, when the Maoists articulated politics more relevant to a larger number of Nepalis, the political forces defending the outdated polity became proportionately more irrelevant. This is why the Maoists won despite India's success in ensuring that the two major left forces, the Maoists and the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist - Leninist), fought the elections against each other.
While supporting the Nepalese monarchy, India also gave refuge to the Nepali Congress party for decades and helped the democratic movement. This often led to tension and friction between Kathmandu and New Delhi. In 2005 New Delhi helped broker the 12-point understanding between the Maoists and Nepal's other political parties enabling the rebels to emerge from the underground. India also played a key role in convincing King Gyanendra to step down.
Instability in Nepal is likely to have an adverse impact on India’s political, economic and security interests. India was instrumental in the conclusion of the 12-point Agreement, which mainstreamed the Maoists in the political process and led to the elections in 2008. However, in the meanwhile, anti-India sentiments have grown substantially in Nepal. There is a deep-rooted suspicion, partly fuelled by the Maoists now, that India is trying its best to stop the Maoists’ rise to power. In the recent past, the Maoists have tried to use China to counter-balance Indian influence. They neither hide their suspicion of India, nor conceal their desire to play the China card against India. Moreover, their linkages with the Indian Maoists remain a constant source of worry for India. Interestingly, there has been an increasing attempt by China in recent years to engage the government, the political parties and the people of Nepal. All this has raised Indian concerns regarding the Maoists and Nepal.
India is faced with difficult choices. Any constructive attempt by India to salvage the situation in Nepal through proactive involvement is likely to be interpreted as unnecessary intervention in the internal affairs of Nepal. But passive indifference to developments in Nepal will be misconstrued as shirking of responsibility by observers at home and abroad.
Prime Minister Wen Jiabao of China, who had cancelled a scheduled visit to Nepal in December for unexplained reasons, halted in Kathmandu for a little more than four hours on January 14, 2012, while on his way from China to Saudi Arabia for an official visit. This is the first time a Chinese Prime Minister had visited Nepal since the visit of the then Chinese Prime Minister Zhu Rongji in 2001. There have been a number of high-level visits of political and military figures from Nepal to China since the Nepalese Maoists came overground, suspended their insurgency and joined the power structure in Nepal, but reciprocal visits from the Chinese side to Nepal were very few. China kept away from getting involved in Nepal’s internal affairs even during the height of Maoist civil war. Actually, it had supplied arms to King Gyanendra when India had not come forward to do so.
However, the Chinese have considerably stepped up assistance to the Nepalese since the end of the monarchy in 2008 and established a "comprehensive and cooperative partnership" with Nepal in 2009. It has strengthened its relationship taking advantage of the pro-Chinese leanings of Maoists. China has strong security concerns in Nepal due to the presence of about 20,000 Tibetan refugees in Nepalese territory and their support to His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the radical Tibetan Youth Congress (TYC).
Nepal signed a deal with China to join China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in 2017. Its long term plan appears to be to link Nepal with Tibet’s large network of road, rail and air infrastructure. This would give a big boost not only to trade but also neutralise India advantage in having better strategic access to Nepal. In 2007-08, China began construction of a 770-kilometre railway connecting Lhasa, the Tibetan capital, with the border town of Khasa in Nepal. Nepal had requested the link to be extended to Kathmandu. When China completes the ambitious project, it would significantly improve China’s strategic access to India’s borders as Chinese are involved in other communication projects underway beyond Kathmandu.
Wen reportedly pledged $140 million in aid to Nepal of which US $ 20 million would be spent on consolidating the peace process and US $ 2 million for strengthening the police. Nepal has reportedly sought Chinese assistance for a modern airport at Pokhra, for the development of its railway network and for the construction of three hydel power stations.
During Nepal’s period of political instability from 2006 to 2011, despite occasional glitches India had wielded its influence carefully and positively to ensure the peace process is not derailed. In appreciation of this, Prime Minister Bhattarai on the eve of his recent visit wrote “India played a positive role in the peace process in Nepal, and during our transition towards democracy. My visit [to India], at this juncture when we are at the last stage of completing the peace process, assumes special significance.” This probably reflects the growing realisation in UCPN(M) how Indian influence could be useful to achieve win-win results in stabilising democracy.
India has also reciprocated this welcome change in the attitude, during the October visit of Prime Minsiter Bhattarai with the signing of two agreements with Nepal. The Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (BIPAA) was a long awaited one; it would smoothen and encourage the flow of Indian investments in Nepal. Bhattarai had apparently chosen to ignore the objection of hard line faction of his party in signing the BIPAA as evident from the black flag wielding party cadres who greeted him on his return to Kathmandu. However, many analysts in Nepal consider this development as success of the country’s economic diplomacy. The other agreement relates to extension of $250 million Dollar credit line from EXIM bank of India on highly concessional terms (1.75% interest with repayment in 20 years). This will be used to finance infrastructure projects including highway, bridges, railway, irrigation, hydro-power etc. Bhattarai had called this development as historic and a major step towards removing distrust in the bilateral relations between Nepal and India.
More important from Indian security point of view, both countries have agreed to check cross-border crime including smuggling of fake currency into India which had been a major cause for concern to India.
India has also agreed to facilitate the speedy execution of construction of roads, rail and Integrated Check Posts along the border areas of Nepal and India. Hiccups in trade and transit issues are also scheduled to be discussed at the ministerial level. India has also agreed to the use of Vishakapatnam port to facilitate Nepal’s third-country trade. It has also conceded Nepal’s demand for importing 200 MW of power from India.
These treaties opened up opportunities for Nepalese citizens to travel, study, and do business freely in India. The extension of non-reciprocal duty free access for Nepalese goods to Indian markets has huge potential as Nepal develops further. Though Nepal largely gained from this arrangement, over dependence upon India has created an anti-India backlash. Under the INTPF, Nepal agreed to depend upon India for security, as well as seek Indian consent to import arms, ammunition and military equipment from other countries. As Nepal gained greater international exposure, these were seen as signs of Indian domination. As a result Nepal has stopped adhering to such stipulations. Many saw the India-assisted development projects as more beneficial to India than Nepal. On trade and transit issues also there had been the strong differences between the two countries as land-locked Nepal was keen to diversify its trade access to other countries over riding Indian concerns.
For most of the twentieth century, Nepal was ruled by the Ranas, a hereditary family of prime ministers who had displaced the Shah dynasty as the real rulers of the country. Then, in the early 1950s, after India gained its independence, King Tribhuvan, with the support of the new democratic Indian government, overthrew the decadent Rana rule and initiated the modern political history of Nepal.
King Tribhuvan and his son, King Mahendra, ruled directly throughout most of the 1950s, except during a brief period of multiparty democracy late in the decade, after which King Mahendra dissolved the elected Congress Party government. In 1962, King Mahendra issued a more royalist constitution establishing a new political structure known as the "Party-less Panchayat" system. This single-party rule banned all political parties and created village, district and national level councils, or panchayats, by which the king could rule without significant opposition.
Although effective at limiting dissent and organized political parties, over the decades, the panchayat government failed to serve the population. It evidenced little interest in addressing the country's systemic problems of social inequality and severe economic underdevelopment.
In 1990, yielding to a variety of political pressures, the panchayat system collapsed and a new multi-party democracy was established under the aegis of a new constitution. This brief period of political liberalization did not last. The new political system, formally a Constitutional Monarchy, was ill-served by many of the political leaders, who fought over power, leading to a new government almost every year from 1990 to 2002. These democratic governments were generally viewed as being extremely corrupt, self-serving and dominated by the same elites as the previous system.
Although the period of parliamentary democracy was unstable, it fostered a rapid increase in civil society organizations that had been banned under the panchayat, including political parties, nongovernmental organizations, human rights agencies, newspapers, magazines and other professional organizations.
In 1994, the United People's Front, a political alliance of several Nepalese leftist parties, split apart. One of its former leaders, Pushpa Kamal Dahal (commonly known as Comrade Prachanda), founded the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoists (CPN-Maoists, or Maoists), a radical splinter group of the Communist Party of Nepal (CPN). The Maoists claim to be inspired by the revolutionary philosophy of Mao Tsetung. However, China disavows any connection between the Maoists and traditional Maoist doctrines of the modern state of China. The Maoists' model is ideologically similar to Peru's Shining Path movement, claiming to be a voice of the poor and to use violence as a means to fight state oppression and police brutality.
On February 13, 1996, citing the government's failure to respond to a memorandum outlining its demands-such as the abolition of royal privileges, the creation of a new constitution and renegotiation of the border with India-the Maoists officially launched their insurgency, the "People's War." The stated intention of the "People's War" is to overthrow the constitutional monarchy and to establish a republic through a constituent assembly.
The Maoists enjoyed some popular support for their cause. This was particularly true among the lesser-educated rural population, many of whom had had very little contact with the government other than through the police and a very poor health and education system at the village level. Over time, however, the Maoists' increased use of violence, intimidation and brutality has alienated many former supporters.
Maoist movement began in the mid-western region, targeting so-called "enemies of the people," such as police, landowners, members of the political parties, teachers, local government officials and others. From the outset, the Maoists have targeted the national infrastructure as a means of destabilizing the country. This has included attacks on airports, bridges, power plants and telecommunications systems, as well as forced "donations" from businesses, organizations and individuals to support their cause. They also carry out general strikes, bandhs, which disrupt trade and transport and cause shortages in food and other essential items by temporarily shutting down major highways, government buildings and schools. Maoist intimidation and harassment of international development agencies to provide forced "donations" has been ongoing for several years, reaching new heights in 2004. The Maoists are also responsible for a range of other egregious abuses against children, as well as adults, such as torture and unlawful killings. In a late 2003 Washington Times article, Maoist Chairman Prachanda claimed that the Maoists control up to 80 percent of Nepalese territory.
Unfortunately, in most rural areas, outside of the district centers, the system of elected local governments, known as Village Development Committees (VDCs), is no longer functioning due to earlier political decisions made in Kathmandu to dissolve local governments. In some cases the VDCs have been replaced by a parallel Maoist "people's government" (jan sarkhar) structure.
The Maoists are generally believed to comprise 3,000 to 4,000 regular troops and an estimated 10,000 to 15,000 local militia members, according to the Small Arms Survey 2003. However, one estimate printed in the New York Times in 2003, even before the escalation of the situation in 2004, placed these numbers as high as 8,000 regular troops and 40,000 irregular fighters.
On November 26, 2001, the government declared a state of emergency in response to the breakdown of the first cease-fire and the first Maoist attack on the RNA. At that time, the government officially authorized the RNA to "disarm" the Maoists. With this declaration, the government also suspended several articles of Nepal's constitution, including those relating to rights of freedom of thought and expression; rights of assembly and movement; the right not to be held in preventive detention without sufficient grounds; and the rights to information, property, privacy and judicial remedy, according to Amnesty International (AI). The government allowed the state of emergency to lapse in August 2002.
Over the years, the government's counterinsurgency has taken many forms, including roadblocks, security checks and blockades of food supplies and shipments of essential goods, all of which have had serious ramifications for daily life in Nepal. In this context, the government is also responsible for a range of egregious child rights abuses, such as unlawful killing, torture, forced disappearance and rape.
Political disagreements have also ensued within the government itself, such as a major disagreement over the proposed extension of the state of emergency in 2002. As a result, the government has suffered several major political upheavals in recent years, including dissolution of the Parliament by Prime Minister Deuba in May of 2002, followed by the dismissal of Prime Minister Deuba by King Gyanendra in October of 2002 on charges of "incompetence" and the indefinite postponement of elections.
Between 2002 and 2004, the king appointed two former panchayat politicians as prime minister, but both governments eventually collapsed. Ironically, in June 2004, King Gyanendra re-appointed Prime Minister Deuba to his position, with the support of other political parties and the stated agenda of restarting peace talks with the Maoists and ensuring elections to take place within a year.
Cease-Fires: Two rounds of negotiations were conducted between the government and the Maoists in 2001 and 2003. In both instances, the Maoist demands included the establishment of a constitutional assembly and a new constitution, while the government protected its interest in sustaining the monarchy and argued that it cannot hold parliamentary elections as violence continues.
What the myth-makers of Kathmandu failed to understand was that the Nepali polity was comprehensively anachronistic, based on a narrow system of accommodation of the urban and rural elites, and unable to deliver even the most rudimentary form of welfare to the vast majority of impoverished rural Nepalis. Left to fend for themselves after a series of betrayals that saw people being deprived of the agrarian livelihood thanks to World Bank-International Monetary Fund reforms, deprived of the water and natural resources thanks to Asian Development Bank-led developmental destruction, denied even basic services such as electricity and a decent education, ordinary Nepalis voted in large numbers for a political force that had articulated a new radicalism in Nepali history and underwent severe hardships to give a voice to peoples' aspirations in the course of the 10-year old civil war.
The mainstream political parties were themselves unable to overcome their ideological paralysis and formulate a clear vision of their politics that would at least have neutralised the loss of credibility that resulted from their craven conduct during the years that they managed the polity between 1991 and 2004. They were unable even to take a definite and categorical position on the question of monarchy and the army, both of which had caused immense damage to rural Nepal through their depredations.
In short, when the Maoists articulated politics more relevant to a larger number of Nepalis, the political forces defending the outdated polity became proportionately more irrelevant. This is why the Maoists won despite India's success in ensuring that the two major left forces, the Maoists and the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist - Leninist), fought the elections against each other.
While supporting the Nepalese monarchy, India also gave refuge to the Nepali Congress party for decades and helped the democratic movement. This often led to tension and friction between Kathmandu and New Delhi. In 2005 New Delhi helped broker the 12-point understanding between the Maoists and Nepal's other political parties enabling the rebels to emerge from the underground. India also played a key role in convincing King Gyanendra to step down.
Instability in Nepal is likely to have an adverse impact on India’s political, economic and security interests. India was instrumental in the conclusion of the 12-point Agreement, which mainstreamed the Maoists in the political process and led to the elections in 2008. However, in the meanwhile, anti-India sentiments have grown substantially in Nepal. There is a deep-rooted suspicion, partly fuelled by the Maoists now, that India is trying its best to stop the Maoists’ rise to power. In the recent past, the Maoists have tried to use China to counter-balance Indian influence. They neither hide their suspicion of India, nor conceal their desire to play the China card against India. Moreover, their linkages with the Indian Maoists remain a constant source of worry for India. Interestingly, there has been an increasing attempt by China in recent years to engage the government, the political parties and the people of Nepal. All this has raised Indian concerns regarding the Maoists and Nepal.
India is faced with difficult choices. Any constructive attempt by India to salvage the situation in Nepal through proactive involvement is likely to be interpreted as unnecessary intervention in the internal affairs of Nepal. But passive indifference to developments in Nepal will be misconstrued as shirking of responsibility by observers at home and abroad.
Prime Minister Wen Jiabao of China, who had cancelled a scheduled visit to Nepal in December for unexplained reasons, halted in Kathmandu for a little more than four hours on January 14, 2012, while on his way from China to Saudi Arabia for an official visit. This is the first time a Chinese Prime Minister had visited Nepal since the visit of the then Chinese Prime Minister Zhu Rongji in 2001. There have been a number of high-level visits of political and military figures from Nepal to China since the Nepalese Maoists came overground, suspended their insurgency and joined the power structure in Nepal, but reciprocal visits from the Chinese side to Nepal were very few. China kept away from getting involved in Nepal’s internal affairs even during the height of Maoist civil war. Actually, it had supplied arms to King Gyanendra when India had not come forward to do so.
However, the Chinese have considerably stepped up assistance to the Nepalese since the end of the monarchy in 2008 and established a "comprehensive and cooperative partnership" with Nepal in 2009. It has strengthened its relationship taking advantage of the pro-Chinese leanings of Maoists. China has strong security concerns in Nepal due to the presence of about 20,000 Tibetan refugees in Nepalese territory and their support to His Holiness the Dalai Lama and the radical Tibetan Youth Congress (TYC).
Nepal signed a deal with China to join China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in 2017. Its long term plan appears to be to link Nepal with Tibet’s large network of road, rail and air infrastructure. This would give a big boost not only to trade but also neutralise India advantage in having better strategic access to Nepal. In 2007-08, China began construction of a 770-kilometre railway connecting Lhasa, the Tibetan capital, with the border town of Khasa in Nepal. Nepal had requested the link to be extended to Kathmandu. When China completes the ambitious project, it would significantly improve China’s strategic access to India’s borders as Chinese are involved in other communication projects underway beyond Kathmandu.
Wen reportedly pledged $140 million in aid to Nepal of which US $ 20 million would be spent on consolidating the peace process and US $ 2 million for strengthening the police. Nepal has reportedly sought Chinese assistance for a modern airport at Pokhra, for the development of its railway network and for the construction of three hydel power stations.
During Nepal’s period of political instability from 2006 to 2011, despite occasional glitches India had wielded its influence carefully and positively to ensure the peace process is not derailed. In appreciation of this, Prime Minister Bhattarai on the eve of his recent visit wrote “India played a positive role in the peace process in Nepal, and during our transition towards democracy. My visit [to India], at this juncture when we are at the last stage of completing the peace process, assumes special significance.” This probably reflects the growing realisation in UCPN(M) how Indian influence could be useful to achieve win-win results in stabilising democracy.
India has also reciprocated this welcome change in the attitude, during the October visit of Prime Minsiter Bhattarai with the signing of two agreements with Nepal. The Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (BIPAA) was a long awaited one; it would smoothen and encourage the flow of Indian investments in Nepal. Bhattarai had apparently chosen to ignore the objection of hard line faction of his party in signing the BIPAA as evident from the black flag wielding party cadres who greeted him on his return to Kathmandu. However, many analysts in Nepal consider this development as success of the country’s economic diplomacy. The other agreement relates to extension of $250 million Dollar credit line from EXIM bank of India on highly concessional terms (1.75% interest with repayment in 20 years). This will be used to finance infrastructure projects including highway, bridges, railway, irrigation, hydro-power etc. Bhattarai had called this development as historic and a major step towards removing distrust in the bilateral relations between Nepal and India.
More important from Indian security point of view, both countries have agreed to check cross-border crime including smuggling of fake currency into India which had been a major cause for concern to India.
India has also agreed to facilitate the speedy execution of construction of roads, rail and Integrated Check Posts along the border areas of Nepal and India. Hiccups in trade and transit issues are also scheduled to be discussed at the ministerial level. India has also agreed to the use of Vishakapatnam port to facilitate Nepal’s third-country trade. It has also conceded Nepal’s demand for importing 200 MW of power from India.
China has opened "Chinese study centres" on the Nepalese side of the open border with India, and that these are engaged in fearmongering about India. Such propaganda can pose a security threat by turning the local population hostile to India.
Power abhors a vacuum. In the 21st-century competition for global influence, there are no "backyards" that can be taken for granted.
Since 2015 Republic of Nepal is no longer 240-year Hindu kingdom. Ancient Nepal has no links with China but with Tibet. Tibetans are not Han Chinese. Soon, China will say Sita was actually Chinese!
There over 55 million veterans, ranging from those who fought in the Korean War (1950-53) to those involuntarily dismissed during the 2015 round of personnel reductions. The problem is not that many veterans are victims of corrupt local officials but that the Internet, despite heavy government censorship, has enabled the veterans to get in contact with each other and organize large demonstrations in the capital. For the government, this type of protest is the most embarrassing. The veterans complaints are basically the same as most other Chinese; corruption, broken promises and officials who appear to ignore legitimate complaints. Since the government has been going to great lengths to ensure the loyalty of the military to the CCP (over anything else) angry veterans have to be handled carefully.
facts_about_17-point_agreement..pdf | |
File Size: | 2880 kb |
File Type: |