'China bashing' in the Indian media

[Delay]

'China bashing' in the Indian media


By Amit Baruah
Editor, BBC Hindi
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img/999999.gif
It's the silly season in India-China relations. If you've tuned into one of the more hawkish Indian television channels or are reading the views of the many experts on India and China, it might seem like the two countries are at each other's throats.
There has been a spate of denials from the Indian foreign ministry, the border guards and even the Indian air force. All insist that there have been no clashes and no violations of Indian air space.
"A media report about two ITBP [Indo-Tibetan Border Police] jawans [soldiers] having been injured due to firing from across the Line of Actual Control has come to notice. It is factually incorrect," the Indian foreign ministry said in a statement on Tuesday.
And here is what the Chinese foreign ministry spokesman had to say about the same incident: "I have not heard of the scenario you mentioned... I have noticed, however, that Indian media has been releasing some groundless information recently. I wonder what their intention is."
'Without pause'
But China's concerns about accuracy do not seem to bother a large chunk of the Indian media, which is engaged in a rather serious bout of "China-bashing" these days.
Such China "stories" continue without pause.
Facts do not seem to matter as some Indian media organisations believe that this is the best way to grab a larger market share.
"Nothing has changed on the ground between the two countries," a senior Indian official, who preferred anonymity, told the BBC.
"I just can't understand the reasons for this hysteria," the official said.
China is India's largest trading partner, with two-way trade volumes crossing $50bn in 2008.
The two countries have been trying to negotiate a solution to their decades-old boundary dispute, a process which shows few signs of reaching fruition anytime soon.
There hasn't been a single fatality in skirmishes along the undefined India-China boundary since 1967, but the memories of the crushing defeat inflicted by the Chinese on India in the 1962 war have not faded from the minds of some Indians.
In a sense, the ghost of 1962 also has not been exorcised from the memories of a certain narrow, but influential, category of retired generals and diplomats, who still harbour ambitions of "giving it back to the Chinese".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8258715.stm

[hulaku]

This news report is dated September 16' 2009

Old news:|

Go on.

[pg_ord]

repost. old news, . he does not talk about the problem but blames the equally ignorant media.

[d'artagnan]

Thus most chinese, despite resenting Japanese, still regard Japan highly as a country we should learn from, I personally is still studying Japanese language since I'm keen to know much more about them.

While Indians, claiming they need to compete with China in everything, including sport after Beijing 2008, can't even manage their Delhi CWG 2010 properly, and just can't stfu and blah blah blah blah blah, "china china china... " "india major power, blah blah blah", you don't even hear Chinese media talking "china super power" that often despite our GDP is way higher than theirs.

[Delay]

This news report is dated September 16' 2009

Old news:|

Go on.

If you have a problem with the article then you should report it.

[hulaku]

If you have a problem with the article then you should report it.

Sorry honey my bad:)

[kurtlogan]

Thus most chinese, despite resenting Japanese, still regard Japan highly as a country we should learn from, I personally is still studying Japanese language since I'm keen to know much more about them.

While Indians, claiming they need to compete with China in everything, including sport after Beijing 2008, can't even manage their Delhi CWG 2010 properly, and just can't stfu and blah blah blah blah blah, "china china china... " "india major power, blah blah blah", you don't even hear Chinese media talking "china super power" that often despite our GDP is way higher than theirs.


Another happy Chinese civil servant. Congrats man you just made another 20 cents

[Chulo]

, you don't even hear Chinese media talking "china super power" that often despite our GDP is way higher than theirs.
Yea, but then China is known as the crybaby state with protest this and protest that about anything that the Government find "offensive"

[pg_ord]

Thus most chinese, despite resenting Japanese, still regard Japan highly as a country we should learn from, I personally is still studying Japanese language since I'm keen to know much more about them.

While Indians, claiming they need to compete with China in everything, including sport after Beijing 2008, can't even manage their Delhi CWG 2010 properly, and just can't stfu and blah blah blah blah blah, "china china china... " "india major power, blah blah blah", you don't even hear Chinese media talking "china super power" that often despite our GDP is way higher than theirs.

I agree Robots can build faster than humans. you win.

[d'artagnan]

Yea, but then China is known as the crybaby state with protest this and protest that about anything that the Government find "offensive"

Coz the message is clear: we don't buy the idea that some countries are using DL or others watever to promote human rights, it's all cynical geopolitical games. And of coz the govt is keen to use the phrase 'huring the feeling of chinese' a lot which is not my cup of tea. Esp, if you refer to the case of DL, no matter what he does, as long as we point our guns to the Sino-indian broaders, he will not have the power to come back. and the last thing he can do is to annoy china, so the max result from his actions is just annoyance. But clearly the govt doesn't even like anything like annoyance.

[Ordie]

India and China are like two old bald men fighting over a comb.

[plato]

Thus most chinese, despite resenting Japanese, still regard Japan highly as a country we should learn from, I personally is still studying Japanese language since I'm keen to know much more about them.

While Indians, claiming they need to compete with China in everything, including sport after Beijing 2008, can't even manage their Delhi CWG 2010 properly, and just can't stfu and blah blah blah blah blah, "china china china... " "india major power, blah blah blah", you don't even hear Chinese media talking "china super power" that often despite our GDP is way higher than theirs.


Coz the message is clear: we don't buy the idea that some countries are using DL or others watever to promote human rights, it's all cynical geopolitical games. And of coz the govt is keen to use the phrase 'huring the feeling of chinese' a lot which is not my cup of tea. Esp, if you refer to the case of DL, no matter what he does, as long as we point our guns to the Sino-indian broaders, he will not have the power to come back. and the last thing he can do is to annoy china, so the max result from his actions is just annoyance. But clearly the govt doesn't even like anything like annoyance.

How can you speak for the Chinese and Indians at the same time? Just speak for yourself, one of the Chinese.

[plato]

At least the Indian media have the freedom to "bash" China. What about China's media (excluding HongKong)? There is ONLY ONE bias in China's media. I prefer many many biases over one bias

[d'artagnan]

At least the Indian media have the freedom to "bash" China. What about China's media (excluding HongKong)? There is ONLY ONE bias in China's media. I prefer many many biases over one bias

While before bashing, indians should realise the reality. So that they wont be caring about tibet while they cant even manage a small Commonwealth game like a pro.

[hulaku]

While before bashing, indians should realise the reality. So that they wont be caring about tibet while they cant even manage a small Commonwealth game like a pro.

Why are you so concerned about a sporting event your country isnt invited at?

[plato]

While before bashing, indians should realise the reality. So that they wont be caring about tibet while they cant even manage a small Commonwealth game like a pro.

You are speaking for Indians, again? Indian media can do whatever they want to. They don't represent the whole Indian nation or people. You just need to speak for yourself as well. What do you know about India?

[d'artagnan]

You are speaking for Indians, again? Indian media can do whatever they want to. They don't represent the whole Indian nation or people. You just need to speak for yourself as well. What do you know about India?

For its bragging while chinese media won't brag as much nor as often as indians do. At least those reporters' writings. One of China's famous news site qq.com has a cover story about china's rise to a powerful country, lots of ppl immediate criticising it for bragging. Indians brag way tooooo much, while can't even host a game properly.

[plato]

For its bragging while chinese media won't brag as much nor as often as indians do. At least those reporters' writings. One of China's famous news site qq.com has a cover story about china's rise to a powerful country, lots of ppl immediate criticising it for bragging. Indians brag way tooooo much, while can't even host a game properly.
You know that? How? You follow Indian media very closely? I don't know about Indian media, but I do follow the Chinese media daily. I don't know what they do in Indian media, do you?

[pg_ord]

For its bragging while chinese media won't brag as much nor as often as indians do. At least those reporters' writings. One of China's famous news site qq.com has a cover story about china's rise to a powerful country, lots of ppl immediate criticising it for bragging. Indians brag way tooooo much, while can't even host a game properly.
I dont understand why *you* people are pissed about Indian media..... we have freedom of speech to express opinions however ****** wrong immature demeaning one might feel about it..... I guess it all comes back to *you* people hating freedom.

[d'artagnan]

You know that? How? You follow Indian media very closely? I don't know about Indian media, but I do follow the Chinese media daily. I don't know what they do in Indian media, do you?

Well, im following the Commonwealth game a bit, since im jus curious how well indians can do. But at first they want to outshine china, but now, they are totally screwing it up. That's despicable.

[Darklord]

http://militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=165242

Repost.

And what is with your obsession with commonwealth games? An event which is a good one year away at that.

[plato]

Well, im following the Commonwealth game a bit, since im jus curious how well indians can do. But at first they want to outshine china, but now, they are totally screwing it up. That's despicable.

"there you go again". You know that? How? How many Indian fellows have you talked to in person? You been to India?

[Lazy Lob]

Dart you little ray of light, you're coming across as a bit of a tw@t.

[Ordie]

Since Hong Kong was a colony of the UK, perhaps China should join the Commonwealth and participate in the games.

[d'artagnan]

Since Hong Kong was a colony of the UK, perhaps China should join the Commonwealth and participate in the games.

lol, want to poke some bad memories of the chinese much so we will be even more determined that the world is bad and we need to be just like the imperial powers in the 19th century?

[Ordie]

lol, want to poke some bad memories of the chinese much so we will be even more determined that the world is bad and we need to be just like the imperial powers in the 19th century?

Why do you behave as a victim?

[pg_ord]

Why do you behave as a victim?
It is actually a sick combination of sense of entitlement and racism. :-(

[CS1.6]

i am a little worried about the Indian media about those "China bashing" news, obviously there is too much of these news come up again and again, the majority of the Indian public will surely choose to believe their media and this will cause the hatred of Indian pubulic to China, which is certainly not good for both countries;

I remember i saw a post here titled with something like It's Time to Play Hardball With China, which is a news title from Indian media, but the post was soonly deletely by the mod. I was shocked that this kind of article was spread publicly by a big and regular media.

On the contrary if you look at the Chinese media about Indian, most of them is about the military purchase of Indian, which is a lot in these days, there is no hatred spreading article in the media. I guarantee you can not find such "Time to Play hardball with xxx" article on the media.

Both Indian and China should focus mainly on their own problems, as third world countries, there are a lot of domestic troubles should be taken care of, though it sounds frastrating but it's actually more urgent and important.

[pg_ord]

I remember i saw a post here titled with something like It's Time to Play Hardball With China, which is a news title from Indian media, but the post was soonly deletely by the mod. I was shocked that this kind of article was spread publicly by a big and regular media.


That is called freedom of expression ....



On the contrary if you look at the Chinese media about Indian, most of them is about the military purchase of Indian, which is a lot in these days, there is no hatred spreading article in the media. I guarantee you can not find such "Time to Play hardball with xxx" article on the media.

Chinese media is state controlled no freedom they regurgitate whatever state says so why bother with these pointless comparisons?

[PeoplesPoster]

On the contrary if you look at the Chinese media about Indian, most of them is about the military purchase of Indian, which is a lot in these days, there is no hatred spreading article in the media. I guarantee you can not find such "Time to Play hardball with xxx" article on the media.


I rather enjoy that China is refraining from the "yellow" journalism that India seem to enjoy so much. I suppose the Indians are just doing it so that they have an outside enemy to focus on instead of their own internal problems.

[TheMiddlePath]

That is called freedom of expression ....

That is called irresponsible press.



Chinese media is state controlled no freedom they regurgitate whatever state says so why bother with these pointless comparisons?

When you do not listen to the other side of the arguement. It is when you get brain wash.

[pg_ord]

That is called irresponsible press.


Your opinion.



When you do not listen to the other side of the arguement. It is when you get brain wash.
Our country does have a diplomatic corp if state has anything it can talk to them.... why drag the free press into it?

[StinkyStreet]

A level of biased Hindu first journalism has always dominated India, and its kinda understandable since the leftists, Lok Sangram Morcha, the Maoists even Muppala Lakshmana Rao are linked to all kinds of crap like kidnappings and blowing things up



Since Hong Kong was a colony of the UK, perhaps China should join the Commonwealth and participate in the games.

The Empire died long ago Ordie, I mean who the hell is in the "Common Wealth" anymore

Stephen Harper?
Jacob Zuma?
The Scottish?
A bunch of sheep shagginess in the Southern Hemisphere
A bunch of really poor African states
Sir Robert Mugabe (Knighted)?

[hulaku]

A level of biased Hindu first journalism has always dominated India, and its kinda understandable since the leftists, Lok Sangram Morcha, the Maoists even Muppala Lakshmana Rao are linked to all kinds of crap like kidnappings and blowing things up


Tough guy where do you get your information from?

[ShanghaiExpress]

http://news.rediff.com/slide-show/2009/oct/13/slide-show-1-china-has-settled-all-land-border-disputes-except-with-india-and-bhutan.htm

M Taylor Fravel believes that India has little reason to worry about the alleged Chinese incursions near Mount Gya and that an increased troop density and the resultant increase in problems do not presage an aggressive move by China.

Dr Fravel is perhaps the premier expert on China's border problems -- although he himself denies it. As MIT's faculty site describes him, Dr Fravel, the Cecil and Ida Green Career Development Associate Professor of Political Science and member of the Security Studies Program at MIT, studies international relations, with a focus on international security, China and East Asia.

He has also authored a book on China's border disputes, Strong Borders, Secure Nation: Cooperation and Conflict in China's Territorial Disputes. A Rhodes Scholar who studied at Oxford University, he has a PhD from Stanford University and a graduate degree from the London School of Economics.

In an interview with rediff.com's P Rajendran, Dr Fravel argues that China has beefed up border security and associated infrastructure along all of its borders not just the one with India, although it has settled all its land border disputes, except those with India and Bhutan. He also suggests that India has tried to make most of the concessions that China was willing to offer, thus influencing the intensity of the conflict.

Dr Fravel believes that while territorial disputes are always intensely emotional, both sides need to sit down and reach a mature compromise on the matter.



As you see it, what is the genesis of India's border problem with China?

The problem goes back to the period of state formation of both modern India and the People's Republic of China.

Are you referring to issues over the McMahon Line?

No, I'm referring to the period after which independent states were established in India and in China, and the efforts by the states to define their boundaries.

You mean this involves only India and China and not the British role when deciding the border?

That's the primary problem (in the India-China border dispute). The McMahon Line and other British policies are a contributing factor. But even in the absence of the McMahon Line the two States would still need to define their boundary and agree upon that boundary.

The McMahon Line provides a reference point for doing so, but, as you know, the history of the Line itself is contested by China today.

You are referring to Jawaharlal Nehru's period as prime minister, right?

The period of Nehru's early rule as well as the period of Mao's early rule because both India and China did not have clearly demarcated borders with all of their neighbours. Especially China. India doesn't have as many neighbours as China.

When I mean "clearly demarcated," I mean a detailed diplomatic document specifying the precise location of the boundary.

China has had boundary disputes with a variety of countries Russia, Japan, Vietnam, the Philippines ...

That's right. China has had territorial disputes with all of its neighbours (except for Sikkim before it was incorporated into India).

Is this something to do with a Chinese need for expansion? For example, as (the well-known activist for an autonomous Tibet) Robert Thurman told me, because the Chinese had occupied Tibet for a short period they believed it belonged to them for all time.

No, I would disagree with that conclusion. When China was established in 1949 the government, led by the Communist Party, sought to consolidate the boundaries of what I would call the late Qing dynasty (the last ruling dynasty rulers of China, which ended in 1912).

But by and large China has accepted more or less the delimitations contained in what China refers to as the unequal treaties that were signed between the Qing government and various foreign powers.

In some areas there were no prior treaties or agreements and in those areas China sought to consolidate control over what it viewed as the extent of Qing power or influence when the Qing collapsed.

What this means is that China has not issued demands for large tracts of territory that were part of the Qing dynasty at its height.

That includes Mongolia, areas in the Russian Far East, areas in Central Asia, areas in Burma, and so forth. If one wanted to conclude that China claims territory in order to expand then one would have to explain why China has not claimed all of this additional territory, which in total size is far greater than the territory contested with its neighbours after 1949.

China only contested roughly 7 percent of the territory that was part of the Qing dynasty at its height.

But the McMahon Line was part of an accord, right (between Britain and Tibet, although China does not recognise its legitimacy)?

The McMahon Line was literally drawn on a map with a thick pen. For the McMahon Line, there is no protocol which uses cartographic techniques to identify the location of the line (Sir Henry) McMahon proposed.

What McMahon did was simply to draw a line on an existing map with a pen. That's not the best way to make a boundary.

That is how Britain divided India and Pakistan, too, right? In a rather arbitrary way.

Yes, the division of Pakistan and India is another great example of poor mapmaking with, as you know, absolutely catastrophic results.

The recent reported incursions into Indian territory have caused much concern in India. And it is fuelled by comments from Chinese sources that China can break up India. How do you think this problem comes about?

The problem comes about because the Government of India and the government of China do not agree upon the location of the Line of Actual Control. That's the fundamental problem.

But this incursion came through a border the two sides had agreed on. Or am I wrong?

After the war in 1962 a zone of control formed between the two sides. It subsequently came to be known as the Line of Actual Control. But the Line of Actual Control was not precisely detailed on a map. And because of the harsh topographical conditions in these areas, most border sentry posts are not actually located on the Line of Actual Control that separates the two sides.

Instead, they are located some distance to the interior on either side.

As I believe one Indian general (Indian Army Chief Deepak Kapoor) said recently, the Line of Actual Control is often a matter of perception. Thus, China may conduct a patrol in an area that India believes is across what it believes to be the Line of Actual Control and thus call that an incursion.

In Chinese eyes, that's not an incursion. Conversely, India may conduct a patrol that China considers to be across the Line of Actual Control.

But...

(Hurrying on) This is very important. What the Indian media refers to as an incursion may not well be incursions. And often times the Indian government denies that incursions have occurred when local officials in India report that they have occurred.

What is clear is (that) Chinese activity on the border has increased in the last several years. What I mean here is the frequency of its patrols, and that in itself is threatening to India if it cannot patrol at the same level of frequency.

Secondly, the quality of the Chinese border troops has increased and the infrastructure that China has created for border defence has improved substantially in the last decade.

For example, there are roads -- not highways -- that connect Chinese sentry posts with each other and also with rear base areas.

In the past, these sentry posts were not connected with each other. From the Chinese perspective, there were large gaps in its border defences. Some of these sentry posts were not connected to any road at all and were only accessible on horseback.

So what China has done since the mid-1990s is to invest heavily in upgrading the infrastructure for its border defences in these remote regions. This includes the border with India but it also includes the border with Russia, the border with Kazakhstan, and all of China's other borders.

All of its borders?

All the borders. So the upgrading of infrastructure is not directed specifically against India; instead, it is part of a general plan to strengthen China's border defences all along its border.

It has a special impact in India because the border isn't resolved. But this is part of a general Chinese policy, not one that is specifically targeting India.

There is the argument made that this could be a way China may be transferring attention from its internal problems and outside the country. Didn't Argentina do that in the Falklands, leading to a war with Britain?

No, I don't think so. China's internal politics has been very turbulent since 1989. China has fought no wars since 1989. If internal domestic political unrest was a cause of conflict one might have seen it frequently in China's foreign policy behaviour over the last 20 years.

So you don't believe that if there is internal strife in China, it could affect other countries like India, right?

Historically, whenever China has faced unrest, especially ethnic unrest in its frontier regions, it has been more willing to compromise with its neighbours than to use force against them. That was one of my main arguments in my book on China's boundaries.

But there has been talk on a Chinese Web site that spoke of how China can deal with India.

I don't know the specifics of what you are referring to and who said it. Because the media in China today is less constrained than it has been in the past, and not all reports that are in the media or on the Internet in China necessarily reflect official positions of the government.

But this was reported as being a think-tank, not the media itself.

It wasn't a think-tank. What you're referring to is a Web site in Shanghai run by some private individuals. It was in no way connected to the government. (Kang Lingyi, the owner of the site, iisc.cn, told the Times of India as much). In other words, the government was not rattling its sabres. It obviously got a lot of attention in India because of the content, which I can understand.

So what do you think is a solution for India and China's border problem?

The only solution is to find some kind of compromise that is deemed to be acceptable to both sides.

Territorial disputes are intensely emotional conflicts between States because they impinge upon conceptions of identity, notions of sovereignty and so forth. Compromising is very difficult.

But disputes can only be settled -- or are almost always settled -- when some compromise solution is found.

There have been efforts before to resolve this crisis. but it doesn't appear to have gone anywhere. Why do you think that is the case? Do you know some cases it may have been set right?

Well, in April of 1960, (then Chinese) premier Zhou Enlai travelled to New Delhi for talks with Indian officials, including prime minister (Jawaharlal) Nehru. And in those talks, Zhou Enlai proposed what was later described as a package deal solution where China would drop its claim in the Eastern sector and India would drop its claim in the Western sector.

At that time Nehru was not -- as I understand the situation -- willing to compromise, largely because of the strong domestic backlash that would follow.

Subsequent to that Deng Xiaoping proposed a similar settlement on the number of occasions in the late 1970s and early 1980s. In the aftermath of the (the 1962 Indo-China) war, however, compromise with China has been even harder for Indian politicians to consider.

This is not to say a compromise cannot be found in the future. It can, but it calls for farsighted leaders who can convince their public that such a solution is the right way to handle the problem.

What mistakes do you think India has itself made that might have made things worse?

India has always preferred what is known as a sector by sector approach, whereby the boundary in each sector is negotiated independently.

Because China expressed a willingness to drop its claim in the Eastern sector, I think India believes that it can use this strategy to maximise concessions from China. Because China has already suggested dropping its claims in one sector, India can also seek concessions in the Western sector.

China has opposed this and one reason why China has increased the prominence of Tawang (in Arunachal Pradesh] is because India prefers to pursue a sector by sector approach.

China is signaling to India that if a sector by sector approach is pursued, China will expect concessions in both sectors from India.

I won't judge that as a mistake. It's not my position to judge either country, but I would just point out how that changed the nature of the intensity by which China has pressed its claims.

What is the status of China's other border disputes?

China has settled all of its land border disputes except those with India and Bhutan.

So China has settled other issues, like the Spratly Islands (with the Taiwan-based Republic of China)?

It has only settled one of its offshore island disputes. When it settled its land border disputes, it did it through compromise agreements where it offered concessions to the opposing sides.

That includes Russia?

It includes Russia, with agreements in 1991, 1994 and 2004. They had similar agreements with Nepal, Burma, Afghanistan, Pakistan Yes, Pakistan is interesting because they signed an agreement in 1963 and this one was only a temporary agreement, pending the settlement of the dispute between India and Pakistan over Kashmir.

When that agreement was signed, India objected because it believed that Pakistan gave away too much of Kashmir to China.

Thus, there is an additional territorial dispute lurking between China and India if the Kashmir conflict is ever resolved.

This gives grist for the mills of nationalists both in India and China?

It is easier to see in India, which is a democracy, but in both countries the persistence of an ongoing territorial dispute does provide fuel for nationalists, especially nationalists who want to criticise their governments for being soft or being weak.

[plato]

That is called irresponsible press.



When you do not listen to the other side of the arguement. It is when you get brain wash.

Thank you for pointing that out, and that other side of the argument is presented by which media in China?

[Ordie]

Newspapers and media never profit from good news.

[TheMiddlePath]

Thank you for pointing that out, and that other side of the argument is presented by which media in China?


The press in China is constantly changing. China needs to develop a responsible press. Besides, as Ordie pointed out a bad news, bias news and exaggerated makes money.
And not to mention China now have more internet users then the entire US population and that is only 25% penetration.

The way the "free" press in India is constantly bashing China, before long it will led to war. This is just like what happen in US durring the run up to Iraq war.

First the press constantly print out "allegations" of intrusion.
Then the politicians (especially that JB Hindu party) demand action based on "credible" press reports.
And the Indian government forced to take action (Or lose the next election) and before you know it a clash occurrs.
And the "free press" then gets into a frenzy and then you have a visious cycle.

This is what I fear will happen and there is no way of stopping it.

[plato]

The press in China is constantly changing. China needs to have a responsible press. Besides, as Ordie pointed out a bad news, bias news and exaggerated makes money.
And not to mention China now have more internet users then the entire US population and that is only 25% penetration.

The way the "free" press in India is constantly bashing China, before long it will led to war. This is just like what happen in US durring the run up to Iraq war.

First the press constantly print out "allegations" of intrusion.
Then the politicians (especially that JB Hindu party) demand action based on "credible" press reports.
And the Indian government forced to take action and before you know it a clash occurrs.
And the "free press" then gets into a frenzy and then you have a visious cycle.

This is what I fear will happen and there is no way of stopping it.

Does China have a "responsible press" that can offer the other side of the argument?

We all know how many people can use internet in China, we also know Chinese Government blocks many sites.

I have to be honest, I don't know much about Indian press. I just wondering do you know much about their press?

[TheMiddlePath]

Does China have a "responsible press" that can offer the other side of the argument?

I have seen enough of the so call "excellant" western press reports on the Tibeten riots so I believe the press in China is more responsible. It is responsible in the sense it helps to promote social stability which help the majority of people. It also helps in promote national unity, friendship between people and nations. Yes it could do more to expose some of the wrong doing.


We all know how many people can use internet in China, we also know Chinese Government blocks many sites.?

Still the Chinese govenment continues to add more and more people on the internet. Beside you cannot block an email.


I have to be honest, I don't know much about Indian press. I just wondering do you know much about their press?

I know the "free" press drove Princess Diana to death.
I know the "free" press jailed Wen Ho Lee for 11 months.
I know the "free" press caused US to attack Iraq and bankcrupting the country in the process.
I know the "free" press "excellent" reports on the Tibetan riots.
I know the "free" press lied about the TAM 3000 death (For 20 years) and the fact that China state control press was more accurate.

So don't blame China if they are a bit apprehensive of the press.

[plato]

I have seen enough of the so call "excellant" western press reports on the Tibeten riots so I believe the press in China is more responsible. It is responsible in the sense it helps to promote social stability which help the majority of people. It also helps in promote national unity, friendship between people and nations. Yes it could do more to expose some of the wrong doing.



Still the Chinese govenment continues to add more and more people on the internet. Beside you cannot block an email.



I know the "free" press drove Princess Diana to death.
I know the "free" press jailed Wen Ho Lee for 11 months.
I know the "free" press caused US to attack Iraq and bankcrupting the country in the process.
I know the "free" press "excellent" reports on the Tibetan riots.
I know the "free" press lied about the TAM 3000 death (For 20 years) and the fact that China state control press was more accurate.

So don't blame China if they are a bit apprehensive of the press.

That is NOT true! China blocked Hotmail for two days in JUNE. That is a fact, go check on that. I was a victim of that blockage.

You failed to address the question I presented. I didn't compare the western media with China's. I asked which responsible Chinese press can offer the other side of the argument. You only said the Chinese press is responsible, I agree with you. They are very responsible to the Chinese government. But, that is NOT what I asked.

[Darklord]

The way the "free" press in India is constantly bashing China, before long it will led to war. This is just like what happen in US durring the run up to Iraq war.

First the press constantly print out "allegations" of intrusion.
Then the politicians (especially that JB Hindu party) demand action based on "credible" press reports.
And the Indian government forced to take action (Or lose the next election) and before you know it a clash occurrs.

You grossly overestimate the mentality of voters of India. If we apply your theory to the Mumbai attacks of last year, BJP would be ruling India now or there would have been a war with Pakistan. Nothing of that sort happened. In fact, Congress came back with a bigger majority than before.

[Ordie]

Does China have a "responsible press" that can offer the other side of the argument?

Being more objective by allowing room for the other side.

[cn_habs]

How can you speak for the Chinese and Indians at the same time? Just speak for yourself, one of the Chinese.

LOL. Most Chinese would agree with him.

DL is just a handy tool whenever some president needs some spotlight and vote. When the Chinese retaliate economically, that leader forgets all about ethics and focuses the dollar sign...

[cn_habs]

Why are you so concerned about a sporting event your country isnt invited at?

We don't really give a darn about how one can be incompetent... rofl
But you know why he mentioned this point.

[cn_habs]

I rather enjoy that China is refraining from the "yellow" journalism that India seem to enjoy so much. I suppose the Indians are just doing it so that they have an outside enemy to focus on instead of their own internal problems.

You are one of the only remaining unbiased posters out there...

[Ordie]

I know the "free-market" press drove Princess Diana to death.
I know the "free"-market" press jailed Wen Ho Lee for 11 months.
I know the "free-market" press caused US to attack Iraq and bankcrupting the country in the process.
I know the "free-market" press "excellent" reports on the Tibetan riots.
I know the "free-market" press lied about the TAM 3000 death (For 20 years) and the fact that China state control press was more accurate.

So don't blame China if they are a bit apprehensive of the free market press.

It all about circulation and ad revenues and guess what....the free-market press exist in China as well.

[TheMiddlePath]

That is NOT true! China blocked Hotmail for two days in JUNE. That is a fact, go check on that. I was a victim of that blockage.

You failed to address the question I presented. I didn't compare the western media with China's. I asked which responsible Chinese press can offer the other side of the argument. You only said the Chinese press is responsible, I agree with you. They are very responsible to the Chinese government. But, that is NOT what I asked.

Its not much different with the main stream western "free" press when it comes to reporting on China. Why do you think the West continue to think Dalai Lama is non-violence and wants only autonomy. Because the Western press does not fully explain China side of the arguement too.

Once BBC had an exclusive interview with China's national miniority official who answered all China' concern on the Tibet issue. It explain clearly why China beleive Dalai Lama is involve in violence and never gives up the fight for independent. I could not find this details in any Western media Why BBC spend so much time on an interview and not post it ? Right around the time of the Beijing Olympic.

Once on a rare occasion an article of a Chinese Government position on a certain topic was printed in full and the next day it was bombarded with accusation of being the month piece of China. The majority of the West just do not want to listen to "the other side". And the media follows the mood of thier respective public so as to make money. So China side is always played down.

Yes China press explains their positions and play down or do not explain the other side's position. That I admitt. But all Chinese knows that as well. The problem is when the media is biased and overtime people think they receive a fair coverage but in fact they slowly get brain washed.

PS: Hotmail blocked for 2 days only ? How about the other 363 days ?

[Ordie]

Its not much different with the main stream western "free" press when it comes to reporting on China. Because the Western press does not fully explain China side of the arguement too.?

Then again, how can you keep governments and businesses honest without the free press?

The lack of transparency especially in financial reporting statistics within China makes it a target for the WSJ and the NYT. Their readership (mostly the business community) depends on its coverage to make an informed judgement and decision.

Being in China last Spring, the People's Daily (English Language Daily) and Global Times English Newsmagazine is more self critical of China than 20 years ago. I do not know what is the tone in the Chinese language papers. Much of the critique is directed at modern Chinese society, (spoiled kids, obesity, and adultery)

If it wasn't for the free press, Wen Ho Lee would not had gained the attention of the Asian American community needed for his release.


Why do you think the West continue to think Dalai Lama is non-voilence and wants only autonomy.

Because there is no eveidence of of him staging an armed rebellion, and his willingness to negotiate.

[plato]

Its not much different with the main stream western "free" press when it comes to reporting on China. Why do you think the West continue to think Dalai Lama is non-voilence and wants only autonomy. Because the Western press does not fully explain China side of the arguement too.

Once BBC had an exclusive interview with China's national miniority official who answered all China' concern on the Tibet issue. It explain clearly why China beleive Dalai Lama is involve in violence and never gives up the fight for independent. I could not find this details in any Western media Why BBC spend so much time on an interview and not post it ? Righht durring the run up to the Beijing Olympic.

Once on a rare occasion an article of a Chinese Government position on a certain topic was printed in full and the next day it was bombarded with accusation of being the month piece of China. The majority of the West just do not want to listen to "the other side". And the media follows the mood of thier respective public so as to make money. So China side is always played down.

Yes China press explains their positions and play down or do not explain the other side's position. That I admitt. But all Chinese knows that as well. The problem is when the media is biased and overtime people think they receive a fair coverage but in fact they slowly get brain washed.

PS: Hotmail blocked for 2 days only ? How about the other 363 days ?

Well, you admitted that and then please practice what you preach. How can one listen to the other side of the argument when it is not even presented?


Yes, Hotmail was blocked for only 2 days in June. I don't know about the other 363 days. It has been blocked several times before June. How many times should it be blocked? It is like defending a murder who killed 2 of the 300 people by asking how about the other 298 people? It is not a crime that the murder killed 2 people? It is only a crime when all 300 people are killed?


That is called irresponsible press.



When you do not listen to the other side of the arguement. It is when you get brain wash.

[Solvent]

Well, you admitted that and then please practice what you preach. How can one listen to the other side of the argument when it is not even presented?


Yes, Hotmail was blocked for only 2 days in June. I don't know about the other 363 days. It has been blocked several times before June. How many times should it be blocked? It is like defending a murder who killed 2 of the 300 people by asking how about the other 298 people? It is not a crime that the murder killed 2 people? It is only a crime when all 300 people are killed?

The 2 days block is for well-known reason. If you don't like it, don't go to China, simple is that.

You talk really like a confused old man.

[plato]

The 2 days block is for well-known reason. If you don't like it, don't go to China, simple is that.

You talk really like a confused old man.

What "well-known reason"? I sure don't like it, and I will still go to China, because China welcomes me. You see, it is not so simple.

You talk really like a rude person.

[hulaku]

The 2 days block is for well-known reason. .

And what was the reason?

[Solvent]

What "well-known reason"? I sure don't like it, and I will still go to China. You see, it is not so simple.

You talk really like a rude person.

20 Anniversary of Tiananmen incident, your guys favorite China bashing material. Remember?

You have been crying out loud for without youtube and hotmail in China recently.

Where is my internet? I am wondering if I can get any from California? Internet.......

http://mercenario.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/screen-grabs-linksys-internet.jpg

[plato]

20 Anniversary of Tiananmen incident, your guys favorite China bashing material. Remember?

You have been crying out loud for without youtube and hotmail in China recently.

Where is my internet? I am wondering if I can get any from California? Internet.......



Why would I use the Tiananmen incident to bash China when it was CCP's mistake? I am sorry, i don't remember that ever being the case. Since you said it was my favorite, then please do find ONE such example.

Yeah, where is your internet? why do you ask me? But, we all know where hotmail is, and it was blocked.

[Solvent]

Why would I use the Tiananmen incident to bash China when it was CCP's mistake? I am sorry, i don't remember that ever being the case.

Yeah, where is your internet? why do you ask me? But, we all know where hotmail is, and it was blocked.

One suggestion for you. If you still insist in going to China, I suggest you to suck up and stop whining, Nancy.

[plato]

One suggestion for you. If you still insist in going to China, I suggest you to suck up and stop whining, Nancy.

I don't insist in going to China. I will go to China, the next trip has already been booked. sorry, i just cannot stop something I don't do.:)

[Solvent]

I don't insist in going to China. I will go to China, the next trip has already been booked. sorry, i just cannot stop something I don't do.:)

OK, Have a wonderful whining trip then. :)

[plato]

OK, Have a wonderful whining trip then. :)
No thanks. I'll have a meaningful trip.

[TheMiddlePath]

I don't insist in going to China. I will go to China, the next trip has already been booked. sorry, i just cannot stop something I don't do.:)

Gosh. I can't beleive China gave you another VISA.

[hulaku]

I don't insist in going to China. I will go to China, the next trip has already been booked. sorry, i just cannot stop something I don't do.:)

Im also going to China next month. Maybe we can meet:)

[plato]

Gosh. I can't beleive China gave you another VISA.

Why? Did I do something undeserving a visa?

[Chulo]

Why? Did I do something undeserving a visa?
You have burned out too many ChiCom drones , and are costing them more money

[Solvent]

Gosh. I can't beleive China gave you another VISA.

As long as he is not going to overstay his VISA, welcome to contribute in Chincom economy. :)

[Ordie]

Im also going to China next month. Maybe we can meet:)

Enjoy your trip.

[Solvent]

Enjoy your trip.

You too, Hulaku, spend more and go back on time.p-)

[ShanghaiExpress]

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KJ17Df02.html

The Dragon spews fire at the Elephant
By M K Bhadrakumar

The surprise element was almost completely lacking. The expectation in Delhi for a while has been that sooner or later Beijing would hit out. Verbal affronts from India were becoming a daily occurrence and a nuisance for Being. Not a single day has passed for the past several months when either influential sections of the Indian strategic community or the English-language media, tied by the umbilical cord of financial patronage to the Indian establishment, failed to indulge in some vituperative attack on Chinese policies and conduct towards India.

Yet, when it finally came on Wednesday, the timing of the cumulative Chinese reaction was most curious. Beijing chose a very special day on its diplomatic calendar to make its point. The prime ministers of Russia and Pakistan, Vladimir Putin and

Yousuf Raza Gilani, and the United States Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell, were on official visits to Beijing. Indeed, Campbell had come on an important mission to prepare for the visit by US President Barack Obama to China next month.

Beijing made a big point that its current ruckus with Delhi was less bilateral and more geopolitical. Indeed, Wednesday's People's Daily commentary on India resorted to a colloquium that hasn't been heard in the dialogue across the Himalayas for very many years.

On the previous day, in two statements the Chinese Foreign Ministry provided the "curtain raiser" for the People's Daily commentary. The first statement focused attention on the recent Indian media campaign against China and asked Delhi to be "conducive toward promoting mutual understanding", rather than publishing false reports on border tensions.

The second statement was substantive and it conveyed that Beijing was "seriously dissatisfied" by the visit of the Indian prime minister 10 days ago to the state of Arunachal Pradesh (which China claims as its territory). The Chinese spokesman said, "China and India have not reached any formal agreement on the border issue. We demand that the Indian side pay attention to the serious and just concerns of the Chinese side and not to provoke incidents in the disputed region, in order to facilitate the healthy development of China-India relations."

The Indian reaction came within hours and was at the highest level of the foreign-policy establishment. Foreign Minister S M Krishna brushed off the Chinese statement, saying, "Well, regardless of what others say, it is the government of India's stated position that Arunachal Pradesh is an integral part of India. We rest at that." He added that Delhi was "disappointed and concerned" over China's objection.

The diplomatic backdrop was evidently getting electrified when the People's Daily struck. It literally tore into Indian policies. Leaving aside specifics, it dealt with what Beijing assessed to be the core issue - India's obsession with superpower status born out of its rooted complexes of having "constantly been under foreign rule ... throughout history" and its "recklessness and arrogance" towards its neighbors. "The dream of superpower is mingled with the thought of hegemony, which places the South Asian giant in an awkward situation and results in its repeated failure," the commentary pointed out.

The striking thing about the Chinese commentary was that it echoed a widespread criticism that is quite often voiced by India's neighbors. The commentary sought to establish a commonality of concerns between China and India's neighbors over the rising tide of Indian nationalism in the past decade or so with its disagreeable manifestations for regional cooperation. "To everyone's disappointment, India pursues a foreign policy of 'befriend the far and attack the near' ... India, which vows to be a superpower, needs to have its eyes on relations with neighbors and abandon its recklessness and arrogance as the world is undergoing earthshaking changes," the commentary claimed.

Beijing surely factored in that almost without exception, India's neighbors voice similar concerns and are currently seeking friendly and close ties with China to balance India's perceived overbearing attitude towards them. In effect, the Chinese commentary tapped into the near-total isolation that India faces today in the South Asian region.

Interestingly, the People's Daily followed up by running a sequel on Thursday, this time harshly telling Delhi a couple of things. One, it underlined that Delhi was seriously mistaken if it estimated that China could be hustled into a border settlement with India through pressure tactics. It affirmed categorically that the border dispute could be settled or a substantial step forward approaching a final solution could be taken "only on the condition that both of them [China and India] are ready to shake off the traditional and deep-seated misunderstandings".

Two, the commentary alleged that Delhi was getting "disoriented when making decisions" because it harbored a notion that the US was viewing India as a counterweight to China. Delhi was also becoming susceptible to the US stratagem to "woo India away from Russia and China and, in the meantime, feeding India's ambition to match China force by force by its ever burgeoning arms sales to India".

Most important, the commentary concluded that although China and India "will never pose a mortal foe to each other", if the Indian establishment and a "handful of irresponsible media institutions" didn't restrain themselves, "an accidental slip or go-off at the border would erode into a war", which neither side wanted. It is very obvious that Beijing sees the Indian establishment's hand behind the vituperative media campaign against China in recent months.

How the tensions pan out is another matter. In immediate terms, a flashpoint arises as the Indian government has approved a visit by the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, in November to Arunachal Pradesh. No doubt, if the visit goes ahead, the Sino-Indian relationship will nosedive into a corridor of deep chill from which it may take a long time for the two countries to emerge.

The curious thing is this will be taking place at a time when the geopolitics of the region and world development as a whole will be passing through a transformative period of far-reaching significance. Given the fact that China's global power is an established reality, India may be painting itself into a corner by opting out of a mutual understanding with Beijing precisely at this juncture when the agenda of global issues and regional security is heavily laden.

On the contrary, if Delhi pays heed to Chinese sensitivities about the Dalai Lama's peregrinations in November, it will be accused by the Indian nationalist camp as buckling under Chinese pressure. An element of grandstanding, unfortunately, is entering into the Sino-Indian relationship, which runs against the grain of its maturing in the recent decade.

Equally, a question mark now envelops the rationale of India hosting the Russian and Chinese foreign ministers in the coming weeks within the framework of the trilateral format. To be sure, the equilibrium within the format has been disturbed. Russia and China have been developing an intense strategic partnership; India's traditional ties with Moscow have significantly weakened under the current pro-US leadership in Delhi; and, now, India's normalization process with China has suffered a severe setback.

At the same time, Russia has begun a serious attempt to choreograph a positive trajectory to its languishing relationship with Pakistan by taking it out of the trough of benign neglect and injecting some dynamism into it. China, of course, enjoys an "all-weather friendship" with Pakistan.

Indian policies are predicated on the assumption that a Sino-US clash of interests is inevitable as China's surge as a world power has become unstoppable, and Washington will have use of Delhi as a counterweight to Beijing sooner than most people would think. Surely, there is disquiet in Delhi about the Barack Obama administration's regional policies, which no longer accord India the status of a pre-eminent power and which place primacy on the US's alliance with India's arch rival, Pakistan.

But Delhi hopes that Obama will ultimately have to pay heed to US business interests and therefore India holds a trump card in the burgeoning market that it offers to the American corporate sector - unlike Pakistan, which is a basket case at best, a can of worms at worst.

Simply put, India is estimated to be the biggest arms buyer in the world and a market estimated to be worth US$100 billion is presenting itself to exploitation by American arms manufacturers - provided Obama has his wits about him and realizes on which side his South Asian bread is buttered. Delhi hopes to incrementally pose an existential choice to Obama through an idiom that the US political establishment understands perfectly well: the business interests of its military-industrial complex.

One thing is clear. Powerful Indian lobbyists have been at work in whipping up a war hysteria and xenophobia over China. The Washington Post recently featured a Delhi-datelined report on the shenanigans of these Indian fat cats who mainly comprise retired Indian defense officials and senior bureaucrats who act as commission agents for big American arms manufacturers. There was a time when the Sandhurst-trained Indian military personnel retired to the cool hill stations and spent the sunset of their lives playing bridge or going for long walks and regaling their visitors with their wartime stories while sipping whisky.

Nowadays, the smart ones among the retired generals and top bureaucrats take up residence in Delhi's suburbs and overnight transform themselves into "strategic thinkers" and begin networking with some American think-tank or the other, while probing a new lease on life as brokers or commission agents for arms manufacturers.

All in all, it is virtually certain that these lobbyists can expect a windfall out of Sino-Indian tensions. After all, a case has been neatly made about the imperatives of a close Indian tie-up with the US. The current Indian political elite doesn't really need any prompting in that direction, but all the same, a degree of public accountability may at times become necessary. Transparency International has bestowed on India the distinction of being one of the most corrupt countries on the planet and it is an open secret that India's arms procurement program provides a vast avenue to siphon off national wealth.

If the Indian market for military hardware is worth $100 billion, it is quite understandable that a gravy train is getting ready for the Indian elites. The People's Daily commentator may have unwittingly waved off the train from the platform. And that was exactly what the Indian elites and fat cats wanted.

Now, all eyes will turn toward the visit by Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Washington in November. Obama has let it be known that Manmohan will be the first dignitary to be honored with a state banquet during his presidency.

The Americans are vastly experienced with the Indians' Himalayan ego and by now they know well enough where and how to tickle Indian vanities. How they pedal fresh dreams to the Indians and pick up the fruits of their endeavors will be keenly watched not only by the multitude of Indians back at home, but also by the Pakistanis, Chinese and the Russians.


Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar was a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service. .

[Eventine]

Bhadrakumar's articles are always a pleasure to read, offering as it does a different look at the forces operating behind the scenes, and which are typically not so apparent in the packaged news fed to us by popular media.

[pg_ord]

Bhadrakumar's articles are always a pleasure to read, offering as it does a different look at the forces operating behind the scenes, and which are typically not so apparent in the packaged news fed to us by popular media.

His opinion but does not really get into details now does it. ;)

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20090917/edit.htm#4

While talks on resolving the border issue have continued regularly after the visit of Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi to China in December 1988, the problem of Chinese intrusions into our territory arises from the fact that while the Line of Control is defined and demarcated by mutual agreement between India and Pakistan in Jammu and Kashmir, the “Line of Actual Control” (LOAC), which both sides have pledged to determine and respect, along the China-India border, has never been demarcated. It was decided that the issue of demarcation would be addressed by India and China exchanging maps about the precise location of the LOAC and reconciling differences through negotiations. While maps were exchanged on the Central Sector (adjoining Uttarakhand) and India provided its maps on the LOAC in the western sector (Ladakh) to China in 2002, China refused to provide maps outlining its version of where the LOAC lies, either on the western sector (Ladakh) or the eastern sector (Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh). In the face of this impasse, it was decided in 2003 that the two countries would seek a “political solution” to the border issue.
It is evident that despite having agreed in principle that there could not be any change in the status of populated areas in 2005, China is now insistent that it would expect territorial concessions in the populated eastern sector, if it is to accommodate Indian claims in Ladakh. Because of the importance of Tawang as a Buddhist Monastery town, where the sixth Dalai Lama was born, China seeks control of Tawang to secure a fig leaf of legitimacy for its rule in Tibet. India has flatly rejected Chinese claims to Tawang, with Mr Pranab Mukherjee asserting: “Any elected Government in India is not permitted by our Constitution to part with any part of our land that sends representatives to the Indian Parliament”.

Thus, as long as China remains insistent on its claims in Arunachal Pradesh, there can be no settlement of the border issue. India has also indicated that it intends to improve communications near and along its land borders with China, boost its military presence in Arunachal Pradesh and also strengthen its eastern air defences. The entire problem of border intrusions today arises from the fact that China wishes to keep its options open by not spelling out where, in its view, the LOAC lies, so that it can continue to intrude, at a time and place of its choosing, into populated areas in Arunachal Pradesh and Ladakh and undermine public confidence in our border areas, in New Delhi’s will and ability to defend our territorial integrity.
Let PRC give its perception of LOAC to Indians, all things can be negotiated. One does not understand its position to obfuscate facts. To me it seems Chinese media are a bunch of lobotomized chimps with pens taking orders from CCP and portraying themselves as "responsible".:roll:

Author BTW is a Retd Foreign service officer who served in Moscow, also was High Commissioner of India in Pakistan.

[Eventine]

The insight Bhadrakumar provides is not the origin of the dispute (which has arguably existed since the formation of the two countries), but why it is being escalated now (despite the conventional wisdom that China and India have nothing to gain from a border conflict).

[pg_ord]

The insight Bhadrakumar provides is not the origin of the dispute (which has arguably existed since the formation of the two countries), but why it is being escalated now (despite the conventional wisdom that China and India have nothing to gain from a border conflict).
Good question. IMHO It all depends on what happens on our western border. p-) .... since our friendly and peaceful neighbor to the west, who also happens to have been a close ally of PRC is weakened, India needs to be balanced and "taught a lesson".

[Eventine]

Why is it always China trying to teach India a lesson, and never India trying to teach China a lesson? Aren't there voices within the Indian military who desire "payback" for 1962?

[pg_ord]

Why is it always China trying to teach India a lesson, and never India trying to teach China a lesson? Aren't there voices within the Indian military who desire "payback" for 1962?
No sir, China had stronger military and it won. What can we do about it? "revenge" is not worth it..... it makes more sense to the strategic community in India (even the so called "hawks") to improve trade and having a liberal visa regime. ;).... in spite of border differences it makes more sense for India and China to work towards common interests.

[Eventine]

True, which is why the present-day saber-rattling is all the more perplexing.

[P.Koschei]

His opinion but does not really get into details now does it. ;)

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20090917/edit.htm#4
Let PRC give its perception of LOAC to Indians, all things can be negotiated. One does not understand its position to obfuscate facts. To me it seems Chinese media are a bunch of lobotomized chimps with pens taking orders from CCP and portraying themselves as "responsible".:roll:

Author BTW is a Retd Foreign service officer who served in Moscow, also was High Commissioner of India in Pakistan.

Indians are truely a delusional people, that they cannot see the blatantly obvious even when it is right in front of their faces. India's irredentist attitude is one of whats mine is mine and whats yours is negotiable. India demands Chinese concessions in Aksai Chin from territory China already holds, but then cries like a little baby and shrilly screams that the Chinese are being aggressive when China wants concessions in Arunachal in return.

If you are going to act like a little bitch, you are going to get treated like a little bitch.
:bash:

http://news.rediff.com/slide-show/2009/oct/13/slide-show-1-china-has-settled-all-land-border-disputes-except-with-india-and-bhutan.htm


What mistakes do you think India has itself made that might have made things worse?

India has always preferred what is known as a sector by sector approach, whereby the boundary in each sector is negotiated independently. Because China expressed a willingness to drop its claim in the Eastern sector, I think India believes that it can use this strategy to maximise concessions from China. Because China has already suggested dropping its claims in one sector, India can also seek concessions in the Western sector. China has opposed this and one reason why China has increased the prominence of Tawang (in Arunachal Pradesh] is because India prefers to pursue a sector by sector approach. China is signaling to India that if a sector by sector approach is pursued, China will expect concessions in both sectors from India.

I won't judge that as a mistake. It's not my position to judge either country, but I would just point out how that changed the nature of the intensity by which China has pressed its claims.

[TheMiddlePath]

Maybe the Indians and the Chinese can exchange Indian and Chinese jokes instead. At least we can all have a good laugh.


BTW a Happy Deepavali to all Hindu posters.

[pg_ord]

Maybe the Indians and the Chinese can exchange Indian and Chinese jokes instead. At least we can all have a good laugh.


BTW a Happy Deepavali to all Indian posters.

Happy Diwali!! :)

Indians are truely a delusional people, that they cannot see the blatantly obvious even when it is right in front of their faces. India's irredentist attitude is one of whats mine is mine and whats yours is negotiable. India demands Chinese concessions in Aksai Chin from territory China already holds, but then cries like a little baby and shrilly screams that the Chinese are being aggressive when China wants concessions in Arunachal in return.

If you are going to act like a little bitch, you are going to get treated like a little bitch.
:bash:

http://news.rediff.com/slide-show/2009/oct/13/slide-show-1-china-has-settled-all-land-border-disputes-except-with-india-and-bhutan.htm
So we are "delusional" what can you do about it?. teach us a lesson? :)

[kurtlogan]

The bitches in Beijing really moan about everything, this land belongs to them, that land belongs to them, Mars, Jupiter and Venus also belongs to them.

Be careful about China's officials coming to your country. Once they take a dump in your toilet they will claim the land on which the toilet was on belongs to them.

[rajkhalsa]

PK,

I'm fascinated at the way you manage to echo to a T the verbiage and tenor of Xinhua and Peoples' Daily english language editorials. I've never seen such a practiced, jargoned propaganda. You're a real pro at this. ;)

It's equally fascinating the way you're seemingly oblivious to how fantastically crude such antiseptic and practiced rhetoric sounds to anyone with the slightest bit of critical thinking ability and experience in world affairs.


Keep posting, you very presence and your hilarious so-thoughtfully-manufactured scorn manages to underscore India's pov far better than any India-strong kiddie fanboy rant here :D Shabash

[P.Koschei]

I am aware of my own excellence and do not require validation from anyone else. I dare say each of my posts is worth much more than a mere 50 cents. A full dollar at the very least.

As to my alleged obliviousness, I am fully aware of the strength of my reasoning. Unfortunately my honeyed words are wasted as most of the people I address happen to be imbeciles. Critical thinking and "experience in world affairs"? Please, I wouldn't trust most of you children to tie your own shoe laces properly, let alone logical consistency.

At least I'm glad you find my presence enlightening, though I assure you my scorn is fully self-actualized and not in the least artificial. It really isn't hard to feel such contempt for so obviously an inferior people.

[rajkhalsa]

LOL

hell hath no fury like the scorn of the Chicom party mouthpiece. rofl

"Self-actualized scorn". Jesus, you don't even use those big, intimidating (*shrudder*) words correctly. Here's another one for ya: obfuscation. No matter how wordy you describe bullsh*t, it's still gonna reek buddy

rofl

Ok, enough feeding the trolls for me.

[pg_ord]

Okay I confess, PK posts are entertaining, racist but entertaining nevertheless. :)