Posted on 05/30/2005 7:32:38 AM PDT by Jeff Head
Sources in Delhi said the recent visit to India of Chinese People’s Liberation Army Chief of Staff General Liang Guangli was aimed at working on an improved protocol described as "confidence building measures" between the two militaries, reports Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.
This is the first visit of a Chinese chief of staff in seven years. It is assumed by intelligence analysts that the Chinese and Indians are developing a protocol to prevent of accidental use of WMDs.
But what if it is more than that?
The warming of relations between China and India, the world's two biggest nations, is giving intelligence analysts in the West nightmares.
India, whose population is expected to surpass China's 1.2 billion some time in the next decade or two, has stopped eyeing Beijing as enemy No. 1.
In one of his meetings earlier this year with a top Indian official, the Chinese premier, Wen Jiabao, is reported to have remarked: "When we shake hands, the whole world will be watching."
Indeed he was right.
Together, the populations of the two giants equals more than a third of all the people on earth.
Without worrying about a threat from India, China is free to consider expansionist policies including, but not limited to, a move against Taiwan.
Separately, both China and India are becoming economic powerhouses. Together, acting in concert, they can make each other stronger – and the leaders of both nations openly acknowledge their preferences for cooperation rather than confrontation in what is being characterized as the dawn of the "Asian Century."
Red China is a real threat. Their sphere of inluence growing to include or encompass India in any major fashion adds to that threat IMHO. That's not manufactured, the Chinese are clearly trying to make it happen.
If we were to get another Clinton type in...who would continue the policies of the Clinton administration as regards China...though I believe it would take longer than such an administration would encompass...the trend towards that could be very real.
IndioChina?? Hasn't that already been tried??
The Chinese threat is perceived as more imminent and direct to India for various reasons. Primarily the outstanding bilateral disputes between India and China have given rise to China-Pakistan axis against India. The regional adversaries not separately but jointly pose a threat to Indian peace and security. Subsequently, it is catalytic to prospective arms race between India and China too.
The collaboration between China and the military regime in Myanmar has put Indian strategic thinkers in dilemma. Especially the information about new Chinese Naval bases warrant the Chinese naval expansion into the Indian Ocean close to India's maritime boundaries. China already has demonstrated its belligerence in 1962.
China as viewed from the Indian perspective: INDIA NEEDS A GRAND STRATEGY TOWARDS CHINA
Our relations should not be based on any other country or threat, whether that is Pakistan or China, even though realpolitik may recommend otherwise. Look at history - realpolitik has always meant perhaps short term gain but long term real trouble. Alliances only work when there are shared values (such as US and UK). This administration understands that and has been moving in that direction. So should we.
I forgot to add in my last post to you: I greatly commend your appreciation of India, especially in this board that has its fair share of India haters.
cheers
I agree whole heartidly. I had the pleasure and hoi=nor of spending a good three to four weeks in India (Bombay, Madras, Bagalore and New Delhi) in the late 1`990's on a consulting trip. Really enjoyed the people I worked with, was surprized at the extent of a lot of the continuing poverty, but really appreciated the efforts by those in the various companies at working through republicam principles, the true free market, and through work ethic and private enterpirze to address those issues. In the end, that is the only way they can be addressed.
That is one of the reason I am so admanent about pointing out and opposing any moves toward the Red Chinese.
Anyhow, thanks for the kind words and for the reasoned and civil response.
Sounds like a plan. But shouldn't we do that here first to see if it works?
Probably as long as it takes to recognize what a 'chain of abuse' is. And that's a whole lot of people to convince there. I expect their statist quo will be maintained until then.
A factor few people consider when they wish freedom and equality upon a peoples is that freedom has to be learned, yearned, and earned. Point to any nation in the world, past or present, whose political/social/economic system has ever matched that of the U.S.A?
None that I can think of. And that's because our forefathers were blessed with an inspirational idea -- the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And that made us an anomoly, if not an outcast amongst the family of nations -- too free for the thugs of world who want to take us down lest their own people get any ideas.
Quote: Ah, time for the weekly pants-wetting China panic article.
Why is it stratergist whenver china does something that is gainst US interest you always seem to be for it??? IT never fails. Always. Is your last name really chiang and are you stationed in Beijing??
I've found a general lack of knowledge of global economics at FR.
And your advancing a theory of trade "entanglement" preventing Chinese aggression proves your supposedly greater understanding? I know this might be a shock to you, but have you considered the novel suggestion that economic "relations" with the U.S. are not the sole explanation, or objective, of Chinese political decisions?
I shouldn't be so stern about this, as you certainly aren't alone making the mistaken assumptions of "trade uber alles", as I will elaborate on below, showing some kindered sentiments expressed even by our President.
In presuming a liberal trade-moderated constraint on the Chinese behavior, can you point out examples where, for sure, they would have commenced war with the West but for the trade "relationship" with the U.S.? Have you read Gordon Thomas's Seeds of Fire? (2002)? Or the testimony of Harry Wu?
And have you read the information provided by Colonel Xu Junping? In January 2001 he was a well-placed Colonel in the People’s Liberation Army (PLA)...but he chose to defect to the United States. Col. Xu disclosed that the Bill Clinton sanctioned assassination attempt on Osama bin Laden after the U. S. embassy destruction in Nairobi had failed due to the specific tip-off provided to bin Laden by the Chinese CSIS which facilitated bin Laden’s escape into the mountains of Afghanistan (p. 492).
It would be Colonel Xu who would also inform George Tenet and Condolezza Rice on September 11, 2001 that Osama bin Laden had made several trips to China in the preceding two years. Thomas also adds that on that same fateful Tuesday, Lieutenant General Mahood Ahmed, head of the Pakistani PIS intelligence service, met in Washington with George Tenet to provide briefing material on the relationship of China to both bin Laden and the Taliban, material which dovetailed with the information communicated by Xu Junping in his debriefing. Thomas then proceeds to relate the most ominous information of all, subsequently corroborated by the Washington Times, that on September 11th, a delegation from China comprised of senior officers of the PLA and the Chinese Bureau of State Security, along with representatives of Chinese military defense contractors Huswei Technologies and ZTE, arrived in Kabul, Afghanistan to conclude a political and military provision pact with the Taliban (p. 492), which in turn promised to employ its influence to defuse Islamic militants operating in the northwestern provinces of mainland China. What is the significance of the bin Laden visits to China in the last two years, quite subsequent to the Khobar Towers bombing in Riyadh in 1996 and the American Embassy bombings in Africa in 1998?
Does the Chinese arrival in Kabul on September 11th to consummate a deal with the Taliban suggest a wider and more newly aggressive PLA and CSIS collaboration with al-Qaeda, the PFLP, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Saddam Hussein, and the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS) and Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)? And is it possible that the continued American embarrassment and consternation over the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden may have resulted in the failure to consider the possibility of the latter’s concealment with an Islamic cell group in northwestern China, with the full shield, knowledge, and concealed consent of Beijing?
The WTO meeting in Doha, Qatar, produced a major plum for the internationalists. Both the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan became members of the World Trade Organization. An interesting speech was made there by President Bush, without much enthusiasm, apparently following a Condi Rice-prepared script, repeated the tired mantra of the free-trade idolaters, expressed the hope that this latest act of appeasement of the Butchers of Beijing will somehow produce reforms in the Communist Chinese government.
"Taking these steps will introduce greater competition into [the economies of China and Taiwan], and mean that both follow the same trade rules as the United States and other trading partners," Bush's speech opined. "This, in turn, will generate greater trade and investment that will bring benefits to businesses, consumers, and workers in all our economies. . . . In the long run, an open, rules-based Chinese economy will be an important underpinning for Chinese democratic reforms."
Bush, adn Rice, unfortunately seem to have forgotten that starry-eyed prognosticators have been saying the same thing for more than 20 years, ever since Deng Xiao Ping instituted the first "democratic" reforms in Communist China in the late 70s. In the ensuing decades, China developed its program of forced abortions, maintained its Laogai system of gulags for political prisoners, massacred pro-freedom demonstrators at Tiananmen Square, stole U. S. military technology and used it to build ICBMs targeted at the U. S., and suborned and corrupted a U. S. President. Nor should we forget that the Chinese military continues its brutal occupation of Tibet and systematic destruction of Tibetan culture. Moreover, the Beijing government has threatened both to invade Taiwan and to attack the United States with nuclear weapons if we intervene to defend Free China.
And as for those long-awaited "democratic reforms," Communist China is still a one-party state, has never held free elections, and continues to persecute religious believers at least as severely as the former Soviet Union. Two decades of trade with the Chinese Communists have only given them the ability to line their own pockets and modernize their military and domestic police-state capabilities. Further economic and political entanglement, via the WTO, will only perpetuate the tragedy of Chinese Communism.
I agree with you Jeff.
"And your advancing a theory of trade "entanglement" preventing Chinese aggression proves your supposedly greater understanding?"
Quite the ego to assume that. I'll let you be happy with it.
Or rebuilt the "Peacekeepers" and put them back in the silos we pulled them out of to appease the Politically correct gods of START. More bang for the buck with the (up to)10 MIRV Peacekeeper vs. the 3 warhead Minuteman III. With all those Chinese and/or Indians, we'll need all the bang we can get.
The world is getting smaller all the time. Truth is rare in all these talks; and negotiations are often for reasons other than the ones stated. Major game being played; and everyone is holding their cards tight to the chest; and bluffing when least expected. Good way to play except who knows who will actually pay up when the time comes?
America has become the caretaker of most everyone that asks. The problem is we are borrowing the money we are go gladly sharing. It is an untenable position to maintain.
For the bible students among us ... ever notice America is not mentioned in Revelations? The EU is. Suggesting that America has passed from the stage of world affairs. Something to consider. God is in control.
Indo/U.S. military exercise = Preparation for any joint action.
Yeah, I can see how India would want to be bosom buddies with the country that gave Pakistan nukes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.