Indo China Relations

[shade2]

What Chinese have done currently is a typical example of tactical retreat. Their economy isn't doing well. They have opened too many fronts than they can handle. Taiwan is still #1 prize. Trump is expected to win and they are afraid he will tariff the Chinese ass further.

Live another day to conquer the rest. So let's all stop going gaga over this news.

This is basically what Erdogand did a year back, previously he had taken panga with a lot of random countries like ours in the name of chummah -e- ummah.

 

[SlayingHell]

What Chinese have done currently is a typical example of tactical retreat. Their economy isn't doing well. They have opened too many fronts than they can handle. Taiwan is still #1 prize. Trump is expected to win and they are afraid he will tariff the Chinese ass further.

Live another day to conquer the rest. So let's all stop going gaga over this news.

Yeah, that is encoded in their Lund Chuu Book of War. Their Generals still kang on that too much when explaining any Military Strategy or Tactics.

 

[Gessler]

Can't help but believe PMO & MEA are once again getting carried away by wishful thinking. Can't imagine what the price will be this time.


View: https://x.com/Chellaney/status/1849436410673017168?t=OR-FS6WVnwmZnbJUlzpbjA&s=19

"Whereas Modi mentioned "a multipolar Asia and a multipolar world," Xi, strikingly, referred only to a multipolar world, as if to confirm that the PRC goal is a Sino-centric Asian order."

There can't be a clearer example of how radically different our views are.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

Can't help but believe PMO & MEA are once again getting carried away by wishful thinking. Can't imagine what the price will be this time.


View: https://x.com/Chellaney/status/1849436410673017168?t=OR-FS6WVnwmZnbJUlzpbjA&s=19

"Whereas Modi mentioned "a multipolar Asia and a multipolar world," Xi, strikingly, referred only to a multipolar world, as if to confirm that the PRC goal is a Sino-centric Asian order."

There can't be a clearer example of how radically different our views are.

The chinese are the oldest beurocratic civiliztion in history of this planet. They understand geopolitics and have understood this for 2000+ years.
Why the hell would China want a multi-polar asia ?

The fundamental rule of geopolitical play, is that peripherial power does not want multipolarity,it wants singularity or duopoly and the central power wants multipolarity.
This is because of power dynamics - geopolitically, the one who is at the centre has most contact with most varied people and adapts to the role of peacemaker the best. This is India in Asia. Smack in the middle of it ( and of the globe too but this matters less in global context so long as you are part of the main world island ( Eurasia) and big enough). So India wants multipolarity.
China is at the ass-end of Asia. It does not want multipolarity, because it does not want Asian powers-that-be that is too far for it to exert direct influence ( eg: Iran or Turkey or Indonesia).

China will take multi-polar world for now, simply because it makes China's challenge to USA more potent. But make no mistake - IF China gets significantly ahead in a multipolar emergent world where US is declining faster than expected, EU remains parlyzed and India doesnt develop as fast as it needs to, China will put the boot down everyone's throat and try becoming new murrica.
We would too, if we were in their place, though as i noted above, India is the fundamental mover for true multipolarity, because India is the 'true' centre of the world geographically, particularly, human geography.

Consider this for a second: if you took the international dateline as point of reference, then the 'human centre of gravity' is Kandahar, Afghanistan. Meaning, as many people live between Kandahar and the international date line going east of it, as west of it and as many north of it as south of it.
This is literally 'india's bajoo mein hi hain' scenario.

This is the most salient fact that has shaped our civilization as the most historically tolerant one, as well as currently the one gunning for world multipolarity, because India is the best situated big nation to be near the most people and most powers in the world ( yes, China is closer to Murrica, though its still absurdly far, yet India is much, MUCH closer to the middle east - a historic, current and most likely a future political & religious driver of the world and significantly closer to YOU-rope, the other main civilizational segment in human history.

The reality of India & China is simple - India will never be secure till Tibet is free of China. or at the very very least, the trans-himalayan mountain region is free of the chinese. Because until that is so, China sits right by the centre of our civilization, the border being like 300km away from the heartland of India ( UP) while its center is another 4000kms away.

Indo-Chinese peace is contingent on partition of Tibet itself - if you draw a line north of Lhasa to the Karakorams, suddenly India & China **BOTH** become highly non-interested in fighting each other, ever, because you'd have to march 1000+km through the shittiest terrain ( Tibet, whic is roughly 2000Km wide North to South) on the planet, to go fight over 1000km depth of the **SAME** shitty terrain, both being 1500+kms from each other's civilization's centre
China knows that sooner or later, India WILL wake up to this position and start manuevering over Tibet, which means, as far as China is concerned, Chinese interests align with murrica to break India, as China cannot possibly give up land to seek permanent peace, being the middle kingdom and all that hulabaloo in their thinking.

But for now, China doesnt wanna break India, because breaking India would make **SURE** that China is broken again by the west and 100 years of injustice becomes 1000 years of chinese culture just being burgerified and pornified for burgerland.

So China sees India as a necessary evil for current times but to be dealt with in future, else lose Tibet.


So we want what we want. China wants what China wants. We are both correct to persue our dharma and we will pay lip service to each other's dharma- that is to be expected. What China has, that India does not, is clarity of geopolitical vision.
And this is why Napoleon himself said, that China is the literal sleeping dragon, when it wakes up, the whole world will shake in fear, way back in 1800 itself. because Napoleon undestood geopolitics and knew enough of Chinese history to know that they too, understand geopolitics.

 

[Gessler]

The chinese are the oldest beurocratic civiliztion in history of this planet. They understand geopolitics and have understood this for 2000+ years.
Why the hell would China want a multi-polar asia ?

The fundamental rule of geopolitical play, is that peripherial power does not want multipolarity,it wants singularity or duopoly and the central power wants multipolarity.
This is because of power dynamics - geopolitically, the one who is at the centre has most contact with most varied people and adapts to the role of peacemaker the best. This is India in Asia. Smack in the middle of it ( and of the globe too but this matters less in global context so long as you are part of the main world island ( Eurasia) and big enough). So India wants multipolarity.
China is at the ass-end of Asia. It does not want multipolarity, because it does not want Asian powers-that-be that is too far for it to exert direct influence ( eg: Iran or Turkey or Indonesia).

China will take multi-polar world for now, simply because it makes China's challenge to USA more potent. But make no mistake - IF China gets significantly ahead in a multipolar emergent world where US is declining faster than expected, EU remains parlyzed and India doesnt develop as fast as it needs to, China will put the boot down everyone's throat and try becoming new murrica.
We would too, if we were in their place, though as i noted above, India is the fundamental mover for true multipolarity, because India is the 'true' centre of the world geographically, particularly, human geography.

Consider this for a second: if you took the international dateline as point of reference, then the 'human centre of gravity' is Kandahar, Afghanistan. Meaning, as many people live between Kandahar and the international date line going east of it, as west of it and as many north of it as south of it.
This is literally 'india's bajoo mein hi hain' scenario.

This is the most salient fact that has shaped our civilization as the most historically tolerant one, as well as currently the one gunning for world multipolarity, because India is the best situated big nation to be near the most people and most powers in the world ( yes, China is closer to Murrica, though its still absurdly far, yet India is much, MUCH closer to the middle east - a historic, current and most likely a future political & religious driver of the world and significantly closer to YOU-rope, the other main civilizational segment in human history.

The reality of India & China is simple - India will never be secure till Tibet is free of China. or at the very very least, the trans-himalayan mountain region is free of the chinese. Because until that is so, China sits right by the centre of our civilization, the border being like 300km away from the heartland of India ( UP) while its center is another 4000kms away.

Indo-Chinese peace is contingent on partition of Tibet itself - if you draw a line north of Lhasa to the Karakorams, suddenly India & China **BOTH** become highly non-interested in fighting each other, ever, because you'd have to march 1000+km through the shittiest terrain ( Tibet, whic is roughly 2000Km wide North to South) on the planet, to go fight over 1000km depth of the **SAME** shitty terrain, both being 1500+kms from each other's civilization's centre
China knows that sooner or later, India WILL wake up to this position and start manuevering over Tibet, which means, as far as China is concerned, Chinese interests align with murrica to break India, as China cannot possibly give up land to seek permanent peace, being the middle kingdom and all that hulabaloo in their thinking.

But for now, China doesnt wanna break India, because breaking India would make **SURE** that China is broken again by the west and 100 years of injustice becomes 1000 years of chinese culture just being burgerified and pornified for burgerland.

So China sees India as a necessary evil for current times but to be dealt with in future, else lose Tibet.


So we want what we want. China wants what China wants. We are both correct to persue our dharma and we will pay lip service to each other's dharma- that is to be expected. What China has, that India does not, is clarity of geopolitical vision.
And this is why Napoleon himself said, that China is the literal sleeping dragon, when it wakes up, the whole world will shake in fear, way back in 1800 itself. because Napoleon undestood geopolitics and knew enough of Chinese history to know that they too, understand geopolitics.

Not disputing any of this. China is very much acting in their own interest, as they should.

The problem only comes when we make too many concessions as we lose sight of the fact that China and India do not want the same things. And then China ends up taking advantage of these concessions in pushing their claims further in the next bout of hostilities.

We've seen that in Chushul all the way back, we've seen that in Doklam and now might again see that - in Depsang this time.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

Not disputing any of this. China is very much acting in their own interest, as they should.

The problem only comes when we make too many concessions as we lose sight of the fact that China and India do not want the same things. And then China ends up taking advantage of these concessions in pushing their claims further in the next bout of hostilities.

We've seen that in Chushul all the way back, we've seen that in Doklam and now might again see that - in Depsang this time.

yes, because china is playing the long game, being the stronger power, India is playing the shorter game, being the weaker power. China knows that salami slicing changes nothing in geopolitical reality of Tibet, it only gives them some local strategic advantage once push comes to shove. Its main focus to do that, is to keep India off balance in forming a cohesive Tibet strategy. China getting chummy with Nepal and really wanting to take Bhutan under their wing is part of this 'save Tibet' strategy. India for now, for the next few decades at least, cannot afford to look at anything else than 'om shanti' at LAC, so it can build infrastructure there.