Geopolitics

The Tibet Issue – A Troubled Neighbourhood
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
Issue Vol. 30.2 Apr-Jun 2015 | Date : 06 May , 2015

While Sardar Patel had warned Nehru about Chinese irredentism and communist imperialism being different from the expansionism or imperialism of Western powers and Chinese ideological expansion concealed behind racial, national or historical claims, China apparently feels her aggression is warranted because under the Tianxia (天下; “Under Heaven”) concept, Chinese perceive all territories under the sun belonging to them. Hence the ambiguity and deceit, and the ‘Doctrine of Pre-emption and Surprise’ encompassing surprise, deception and shock – plus the façade of peace homilies. That is why China has been providing tacit support to Pakistan’s anti-India jihadist groups in India; ‘Shashou Jian (Assassin’s Mace) incapacitating India from within through insurgencies and terrorism. It is also well understood that Chinese aggression of Tibet and Aksai Chin has been tempered because of the presence of minerals and natural resources like water, including possible thorium reserves.

Until the early 13 Century, China had no claims on Tibet which ruled half of present day China but looked to India for its most significant influence, Buddhism…

“Even during the 1962 conflict, Chinese leaders, including Mao, acknowledged that the conflict was not about the boundary or territory but about Tibet. The Chinese consistently tried to obtain reassurance from India that…India would not ‘meddle’ in Tibetan affairs…Boundary infringements by the Chinese continued. Sino-Indian border negotiations are stalemated and progress, if any, is at a snail’s pace. Thus, Tibet still remains the core issue.” —R.S Kalha, IFS (Retd.)

At a recent National Prayer Breakfast in Washington DC attended for the first time together by President Obama and the Dalai Lama, as Obama welcomed the Dalai Lama as a ‘good friend’, pressed his hands together in a prayer-like position and bowed his head toward him before giving him a wave and a broad smile, China went into convulsions.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said China regards the Tibetan spiritual leader as a political exile working to overthrow Chinese rule over the Himalayan region under the cloak of religion. If the mighty CCP having invaded and ravaged Tibet is scared of the Dalai Lama despite China’s massive economic and military might, there can just be one conclusion that the guilty conscience is gnawing China’s innards and to cover the shame of the misdeeds it is perpetuating even today, offence is being used in self-defence. Having reduced the Tibetan population in Tibet to a minority and increasingly strangling them culturally, socially and environmentally, does China expect the Dalai Lama to rake up a religious uprising in the face of Tiananmen-type atrocities especially when all the Dalai Lama has been wanting is peace for his people, religious freedom saving Tibet’s culture and environment.

Chinese claim that Tibet has been part of China for around 800 years is fallacious…

Ancient Tibet

Tibet should actually be the world’s tenth largest nation. It lies between China and India with extensive mountain ranges East of the Tibetan Plateau bordering China and the Himalayan massif separating it from India, Bhutan and Nepal. So it is rightly called the ‘roof of the world’. The Tibetan Empire historically was established by King Songtsan Gampo in the seventh century by uniting parts of the Yartung River Valley. Under the next few Tibetan kings, Buddhism became established as the state religion and Tibetan power increased even further over large areas of Central Asia, while major inroads were made into Chinese territory, even reaching China’s Tang Dynasty capital.

John Man in his treatise on Kublai Khan wrote that in the seventh century, Tibet was an empire spanning the high heartland and deserts of the Northwest, reaching from the borders of Uzbekistan to Central China, from halfway across Xinjiang, an area larger than the Chinese heartland. Indeed in 763 AD, the Tibetan army briefly captured the Chinese capital Chang-an (today’s Xian) and much later, it was the Mongols who ruled China then occupied Tibet. So should Mongolia claim China and Tibet? Historically until the early 13th Century, China had no claims on Tibet. Indeed the opposite applied – Tibet ruled half of present day China but looked to India for its most significant influence, Buddhism.

From the 780s to the 790s, the Tibetan empire ruled and controlled a territory stretching over modern day Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Myanmar, China, India, Nepal, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. In 821/822 CE, Tibet and China signed a peace treaty that included details of the borders between the two countries, details of which are also engraved on a stone pillar in Lhasa.

Tibet should actually be the world’s tenth largest nation…

Status of Tibet – 1914 Shimla Convention Agreement

In 1914, representatives of Britain, China and Tibet attended a conference at Shimla in India and drew up an agreement concerning Tibet’s status and borders. The McMahon Line was decided upon during the 1914 Shimla Convention.

The agreement was signed by representatives of British India, Tibet (Lonchen Shatra Dorje) and China (Ivan Chen), all affixing full signatures to the agreement and the appended maps showing alignment of the McMohan Line on the maps. Copies of these maps and the photograph of the attendees of the 1914 Shimla Convention are on record. Representatives of those days are equivalent to today’s Ambassadors.

But despite the Chinese Representative (Ivan Chen) having affixed signatures to the 1914 Shimla Convention, China reneged on it saying that the Chinese Representative did not have the permission of the Chinese Government, which is a lame and absurd excuse. It is impossible that a Chinese representative affixed his signatures without prior consultation and consent of his government. Where Ivan Chen went wrong is that he should have looked into the future and obtained directions from Mao and his communist China that was to come 35 years later. In any case Ivan Chen was probably executed with his family obliterated to deny any trace of notes or word by mouth.

If China does not accept the 1914 Shimla Convention Agreement, then the Seventeen Point Agreement signed in 1951, too has no legal standing…

Fallacious Chinese Claims

Tibet maintained a unique culture, written and spoken language, religion and political system for centuries though in the modern sense never talked about it as a nation state. In its long history, Tibet was influenced by foreign powers and cultures including British India, the Mongols, as well as China. However, the Chinese claim that Tibet has been part of China for around 800 years is fallacious and not supported by facts. Tibet was not ruled by the Chinese government prior to the 1950 invasion.

In 1912, the 13th Dalai Lama, Tibet’s political and spiritual leader had issued a proclamation reaffirming Tibet’s independence and the country maintained its own national flag, currency, stamps, passports and army. It signed international treaties and maintained diplomatic relations with neighbouring countries. From a legal point of view, Tibet remains an independent state under illegal occupation, a fact that China is trying her level best to whitewash from history.

Invasion and Annexation of Tibet

The sole reason for China’s invasion and annexation of Tibet is contained in Mao Zhedong’s statement endorsed by Deng Xiaoping, in saying, “Tibet is the palm of China and Ladakh, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan and NEFA are its fingers”. It is a pure case of aggression and expansionism, continuing to date with spurious claims in Asia Pacific and claiming/nibbling vast tracts of Indian territories including the laughable claim to entire Arunachal Pradesh put forward as late as 2005.

China arbitrarily extended her EEZ and claims to the ECS and SCS based on what was fabricated by the Kuomintang, a government that the communist regime overthrew in 1949, cashing upon their claims decades later. Getting back to Tibet, the Tibetans wanted to retain their territorial integrity and sought dialogue with PRC since March 1950. Eventually, in September 1950, a Tibetan delegation met PRC’s General Yuan Zhongxian in New Delhi with the latter communicating a three-point proposal that included:

The six million Tibetan population has been overwhelmed by the 7.5 million Han Chinese…

  • Tibet be regarded as part of China
  • China be responsible for Tibet’s defence
  • China be responsible for Tibet’s trade and foreign relations.

He also threatened that acceptance would lead to peaceful Chinese sovereignty, or otherwise war. The Tibetan delegation wanted to maintain the relationship between China and Tibet as one of priest-patron. Tsepon WD Shakbpa, leader of the Tibetan delegation maintained, “Tibet will remain independent as it is at present, and we will continue to have very close ‘priest-patron’ relations with China. Also, there is no need to liberate Tibet from imperialism, since there are no British, American or Guomindang imperialists in Tibet, and Tibet is ruled and protected by the Dalai Lama (not any foreign power).” He, however, recommended that while Chinese troops need not be stationed in Tibet as there was no threat, and in case attacked by India or Nepal could appeal for Chinese military assistance.

But limbless Mao had already decided to acquire a palm for PRC (Tibet) and fingers (Ladakh, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan and NEFA). So, on October 07, 1950, Chinese troops advanced into Eastern Tibet, crossing the border at five places to capture the Tibetan troops in Qamdo, demoralise the Lhasa government, and thus exert powerful pressure to send negotiators to Beijing to sign the terms for a handover of Tibet. Such conditions were naturally not acceptable to Tibet. Qamdo fell on October 19, 1950.

The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) sent released prisoners including Governor Ngapoi Ngawang Jigme to Lhasa to negotiate with the Dalai Lama on the PLA’s behalf. The Government of Tibet then sent representatives to Beijing to negotiate. But no negotiations were permitted by PRC to the already drafted Seventeen Point Agreement. The focal point of the Agreement was that Tibet would agree to be part of China. The Tibetan delegation was not allowed to communicate with their government on this key point, and pressured into signing the agreement on May 23, 1951, despite never having been given permission to sign anything in the name of the government, authorising the PLA presence and CPC government rule politically. This Chinese treachery needs to be compared with her reneging to the 1914 Shimla Convention Agreement maintaining Tibet’s territorial integrity and delineating the McMahon Line on grounds that Ivan Chen (China’s Representative) did not have clearance from the Chinese Government.

China has unleashed a systematic cultural genocide in Tibet…

Thereafter, the PLA entered Lhasa. In 1956, Tibetan militias in the ethnically Tibetan region of Eastern Kham just outside the Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR), spurred by PRC government experiments in land reform started fighting against the government. When the fighting spread to Lhasa in 1959, the Dalai Lama fled Tibet and sought asylum in India. Both the Dalai Lama and the PRC government in Tibet subsequently repudiated the Seventeen Point Agreement and the PRC government in Tibet dissolved the Tibetan Local Government.

The case was, therefore, quite simple. If China does not accept the 1914 Shimla Convention Agreement, then similarly the Seventeen Point Agreement signed on May 23, 1951, too has no legal standing. Therefore, technically Nepal and Bhutan continue to border Tibet, not China and India borders China only in North Kashmir East of the Wakhan Corridor on the junction of India-Afghanistan-China, with balance border with Tibet. The Tibetan Army and the Tibetan uprising, however, stood no chance against over 30,000 battle hardened PLA soldiers who had already killed millions of their own countrymen during the ‘Great Leap’.

India’s Default

As to the cries of the Tibetans against the Chinese aggression, El Salvador sponsored a resolution at the UN but it is said that India and UK prevented any date. More significantly, former Ambassador R S Kalha wrote in his book ‘The Dynamics of Preventive Diplomacy’ that during the period of the Korean conflict, several ‘neutral’ countries were active in trying to promote peace on the Korean peninsula. One of the countries that was most active was India. Indian diplomats were active on both sides, often travelling to Beijing, Moscow, Washington and New York in order to promote a peaceful settlement.

New Delhi’s cowardice when it comes to defending democratic values should trouble all those in the West…

It is said that India did not take the Chinese intervention in Tibet seriously and refused to take up the Tibetan cause in the UN, since it wished to play a greater role on the world stage, particularly in defusing the tension on the Korean peninsula. On November 18, 1950, the US Ambassador at New Delhi reported to the US Secretary of State that the then Secretary General of the External Affairs Ministry Sir Girija Shankar Bajpai told him that India wished to delay “action” on the Tibetan demarches to the UN due to its “efforts” in achieving a ceasefire in Korea.

Similarly, the British were informed that the “timing of the Tibetan appeal needed careful consideration. Korea was obviously of first importance.” Apparently, Nehru’s vision was coloured not only with the Chinese hoodwinking him but also his ambition for a Nobel Peace Prize that looked closer by giving preference to the Korean Peninsula over the Chinese invasion in Tibet. Ironically, India was also supplying rice to the PLA terrorising the Tibetans in TAR while Nehru actively campaigned for China’s entry into the UN. That Nehru had no strategic sense was again demonstrated when he stopped his own army in pushing fleeing Pakistani marauders out of POK in 1948 and gave Pakistan a border with China, which the former never had.

Genocide in Tibet

Since invading Tibet, China has unleashed a systematic cultural genocide in Tibet. The six million Tibetan population has been overwhelmed by the 7.5 million Han Chinese as part of a well-planned demographic invasion. China is systematically attacking the Tibetan language, literature, heritage and culture in a bid to destroy it into extinction. Tibetan language has been replaced by Chinese in TAR. Once China succeeds in destroying the Tibetan language, the ancient treasure scripted over centuries will automatically come to naught.

China has repeatedly denounced the Dalai Lama, the exiled spiritual leader as a “splittist”…

Deliberate and systematic disappearance of bilingual billboards, license plates, road signs, name plates, official banners and storefronts in TAR are part of the same cultural genocide. All these blatant measures were adopted despite the Chinese Constitution guaranteeing ethnic groups the right to give priority to their own language in education and daily use. The CCP has also now adopted a harsh stance against Tibetan monasteries.

In January 2014, there was news of three Buddhist monasteries (Dron-na, Tarmoe and Rabten) forced to shut down in Driru County, Kham Region of Eastern Tibet in TAR, where monks have been forced to vacate – all under the garb of CCP “patriotic re-education” campaign, even issuing orders for the Chinese flag to be put atop private homes. There have also reports of closed monasteries turned into prisons. These are but some news items that have filtered out because the Chinese government has enforced a total clampdown on media and communications in TAR lest full details of the cultural genocide gets revealed.

During 2013, Jamphel Yeshi’s self-immolation fiery protest in India during the BRICS Summit against Chinese genocide in Tibet was captured in full, horrifying detail by the press and sparked visceral reactions around the globe. This was unlike similar incidents in Tibetan areas of China, where most of the 30 earlier immolations had occurred. The TIME magazine noted, “This summit will be forever in the shadow of something far simpler and more elemental: the image of one man on fire,” while questioning how India could sink so low as to invoke a colonial-era law against Tibetans to keep them effectively under house arrest.

Forbes magazine stated, “It was a considerably poorer and weaker India” that ever truly challenged China in the name of liberal democratic values…This unyielding resolve to uphold rights will seem almost foreign to anyone acquainted with the state of free expression in today’s India. Only last year, India imposed cuts on a Bollywood movie that displayed a stray ‘Free Tibet’ flag for a fleeting moment….New Delhi’s cowardice when it comes to defending democratic values should trouble all those in the West who champion India because it is a democracy.”

Chinese scholars, strategists and more importantly, the Chinese government need to understand that Pakistan has no claim on the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir…

It is only during President Xi Jinping’s visit to India last year that Tibetan protesters could protest outside Hyderabad house in New Delhi. Lobsang Sangay, Prime Minister of the Tibetan Government-in-exile in Dharamshala has testified to the US Congressional Committee on the human rights situation in the Tibetan areas of China. He blames the Chinese refusal to accept the reality of the ground situation in the Tibetan areas for the continuing unrest, adding, “The actions of Tibetans who pour gasoline over themselves are clear indications of their desperation and frustration and of the urgency of the situation inside Tibet.”

China had recently offered rewards of up to 300,000 RMB ($48,000) for tip-offs on overseas terrorist organisations and their members’ activities inside China, the spreading of religious extremism, terror related propaganda, those producing, selling and owning weapons, activities that help terrorists cross national borders and terror activities via the internet. This strategy is titled “People’s War Against Terrorism”. That new definition has implications for Tibet.

China has repeatedly denounced the Dalai Lama, the exiled spiritual leader, as a “splittist,” arguing that his talk of a “middle way” and increased Tibetan autonomy is merely code for outright Tibetan independence. Chinese authorities have vowed to crack down on officials within Tibet that “…follow the 14th Dalai Lama to split the country, break ethnic unity, participate in illegal organizations and activities, and spread reactionary opinions.” In 2014, the International Campaign for Tibet had warned, “The counter-terrorism drive in Tibet has a particular political dimension, involving training of police in Buddhist monasteries, the characterisation of religious teachings by the Dalai Lama as incitement to ‘hatred’ and ‘extremist action’ and the implication that Tibetan self-immolations can be characterised as ‘terrorism.”

Why does China not accept ‘One India’ by recognising the legal accession of the state of Jammu and Kashmir to India?

The Sino-Indian Equation

While Sardar Patel had warned Nehru about Chinese irredentism and communist imperialism being different from the expansionism or imperialism of Western powers and Chinese ideological expansion concealed behind racial, national or historical claims, China apparently feels her aggression is warranted because under the Tianxia (天下; “Under Heaven”) concept, Chinese perceive all territories under the sun belonging to them. Hence the ambiguity and deceit, and the ‘Doctrine of Pre-emption and Surprise’ encompassing surprise, deception and shock – plus the façade of peace homilies. That is why China has been providing tacit support to Pakistan’s anti-India jihadist groups in India; ‘Shashou Jian (Assassin’s Mace) incapacitating India from within through insurgencies and terrorism. It is also well understood that Chinese aggression of Tibet and Aksai Chin has been tempered because of the presence of minerals and natural resources like water, including possible thorium reserves.

It is important for Chinese scholars, strategists and more importantly, the Chinese government to understand that Pakistan has no claim on the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir, being an aggressor and imposter. Unlike Tibet, Kashmir was legally ceded to India. What led to the then Maharaja of Kashmir Hari Singh to cede the state of Jammu and Kashmir to India is contained in his letter dated October 26, 1947, to Lord Mountbatten, clearly describing the blatant aggression by Pakistan. Also acknowledging the aggression by Pakistan, Lord Mounbatten accepted this Instrument of Accession.

The complaint made by India to the UN on January 01, 1948, too conveyed Pakistan’s aggression to the international community. On February 05, 1948, Sheikh Abdullah addressed the UNSC asking for the world body to force Pakistan to vacate its troops from Jammu and Kashmir. Most significantly, the UN Resolution of August 13, 1948, clearly stated that Pakistan should vacate the state of Jammu and Kashmir, conveying indirectly that Pakistan had been consistently lying on the question of whether or not her troops were involved in the aggression of Jammu and Kashmir.

China wants India to recognise the ‘One China’ policy…

Still more importantly, it is when the Pakistani Prime Minister conceded that Pakistani troops were indeed involved, the UN asked Pakistan to vacate Jammu and Kashmir. The Resolution on Assurance adopted by UN Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP) 1948 further endorsed this fact. China should realise that Pakistan had absolutely no legal authority for leasing out the Shaksgam Valley to China in 1963 and same goes for Pakistan’s move to lease out the Gilgit-Baltistan (GB) area.

Chinese claims in the North East Frontier Agency (NEFA) in Arunachal Pradesh were initially limited to the Tawang Monastery on grounds that Tibetans come to pray at the ancient Tawang Monastery. So what about the enclaves of Minsar (Men ser), near Lake Mansarovar (Ma pham) which are for annual pilgrimage for all Indians and Bhutanese enclave Tconsists of Darchen (Dar chen) Labrang near Mount Kailash (Gangs rin po che, Ti se) again used by Bhutanese and Indians for periodic pilgrimage – both these enclaves being under illegal occupation of China?

The media has indicated continued Chinese obduracy with respect to Arunachal Pradesh…

Incidentally, Mount Kailash is the abode of an Indian God as per ancient mythology. Why China proposed the alternative route to Mansarovar via Nathu La is to bury any future discussion on about the Minsar and Tconsists of Darchen enclaves despite the fact that devotees attach great significance to the traditional routes of pilgrimage. Indian authorities need to keep this in mind while negotiating a settlement on the Sino-Indian border.

China wants India to recognise the ‘One China’ policy. But why then China does not accept ‘One India’ by recognising the legal accession of the state of Jammu and Kashmir to India on October 26, 1947? It would make Chinese occupation of the Shaksgam Valley and Aksai Chin illegal but that can be negotiated between the special representatives of both countries negotiating the border. Last year, the Indian Foreign Minister had stated, “When they (China) raised with us the issue of Tibet and Taiwan, we shared their sensibilities. So, we want they should understand and appreciate our sensibilities regarding Arunachal Pradesh.” Our NSA too conveyed to Beijing that Chinese activities in POK will affect the resolution of the Kashmir issue. Recently, the media has indicated continued Chinese obduracy with respect to Arunachal Pradesh. In that case, there will be no reason why India should abide by ‘One China’ policy.

Rate this Article
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
The views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of the Indian Defence Review.

About the Author

Lt Gen Prakash Katoch

is a former Lt Gen Special Forces, Indian Army

More by the same author

Post your Comment

2000characters left

7 thoughts on “The Tibet Issue – A Troubled Neighbourhood

  1. Maybe while those millions of bank robbers are outside that country, we could ENDOCTRINATE THEM TO RECOGNIZE THST TIBET HAS NEVER BEEN A PART OF CHINA. THAT THE HIGH INTELLECTUAL LEVEL OF THEIR LANGUAGE PROVES IT for a start.
    Maybe then, governments can accept to PROTECT THEM FROM EXECUTION for having ROBBED XI’S BANKS of BILLIONS OF DOLLARS which he wants back along with his criminals.
    These chinese UNDERSTAND now what it is like to live in fear of punishment, although the crime is slightly different, from stealing millions to OWNING A PICTURE OF HHDL, which leads to EXECUTION… carefully though so all organs can be removed and sold to westerners for transplants.
    What a joke that place!!!! Let alone the people!!! Daring to EXPECT CANADA for example to PROTECT THEM, when Harper was regularly REJECTING TIBETANS APPLICATIONS for a bribe, under Hu and Wen’s orders!!!
    What a mentality!!!

  2. Can India retain Arunchal Pradesh? Militarily India is weaker then both the Nuclear powers. In a lightening attack China can do it and declare cease fire . Nuclear weapons will not prevent the redrawal of the Geographic lines. Military strategy and weapons are flawed. Air Force squadrons comprising of Migs and Sukhois are beset with technical problems and spares. Naval submarines are in a similar predicament with almost all the submarines on the verge of retirement. Corruption in military has left india with a massive hole.

  3. well written sir. in one of my comments in an article on this website on strengthening the eastern command, I had said and at the cost of repeating my self, I state that China has tied us down on a defensive posture in two theatres and each having 2 sub critical sub sectors. Its time that India adopts an offensive – defensive doctrine by doing 1) increasing organic and manoeuvre capability of Eastern formations and have deeper FEBA delivery vehicles for organic weapons. 2) integrate IAF, IA, AR, SFF, ITBP formation under a unified command which will give more depth, reach, flexibility & cohesion. 3) create an air / land mobile theatre forces which can threaten, the central sectors from HP, UK, spread the concentration of PLA/PLAAF or force them to strain there economy by deploying more to these theatres thereby weakening Western provinces of PRC to extremism. 4) aggressive COIN ops in East to decimate NSCN and its factions which are extensions of PLA intervention arm. 5) Formations such 2nd, 5th, 21st, 54th Divs & 33rd Corps need denser organic throw weight and with deeper and more penetrable reach, currently there deployments are defensive in nature, it has to change for the PLA to get reactive and not proactive. 6) revive Tibetan independence movements within Occupied Tibet as a riposte for PRC support to Naxals, NSCN and all such movements since 1960s. Countless Soldiers have fallen in wain, time to return the favour. The one issue that degrades national and regional economies is insurgency, independence movements and suppression regimes. 7) Increase in Organic firepower and boots on the ground in eastern Himachal. this way you confine PLA/PLAAF to 3rd Div Sector only
    Your comments sir

  4. A good article. It again shows that the so called great leaders of country affected the future of our country. India should never accept One China Policy. As, China has already shown up their obduracy to capture Indian Land. The only way China today look toward India is like a dark horse in power game, who can challenge China in future.

  5. India should change its diplomatic stand and not recognize China’s One China policy. By changing the stand, India will not recognize Tibet, East Turkestan, Inner Mongolia and Taiwan as part of China. China recognition of Sikkim in exchange for recognition of Tibet does not matter, since Sikkim is recognition by other countries as part of India. It should also be noted that China considers J&K as a disputed territory. Meaning, it does not recognize J&K as part of India. Further, China is in illegal occupation of Aksai Chin, which is part of India. In any future conflict with China, India should aim to liberate Tibet & East Turkestan from China. This will have many strategic benefits. Independent Tibet will act as a buffer between India and China. China’s direct land access to Pakistan and more importantly to Middle East will be severed. India can maintain military bases in Tibet & keep an assertive posture. Independent East Turkestan will give India direct land access to Central Asia. In order to achieve this, India needs to ramp up its military capability on a war footing. India needs to increase the corps size from 14 to 30 by 2030. All corps should have 4 divisions of 15000 men. This will increase the strength of infantry to 1.8 million. Each corps should have dedicated artillery, air defence & armored divisions depending on the terrain the corps will be fighting apart from aviation, engineering, logistics and signals brigades. The IAF should also assign dedicated tactical fighters to support the army. The IAF should also induct fighter jets for both defensive and offensive roles. IAF should be able to achieve air superiority over Tibet and East Turkestan & also be able to strike the middle kingdom. The Navy should induct 6 CBG’s, 72 SSK’s, 18 SSN’s and 18 SSBN’s by 2030. Nuke arsenal should also be increased to equal the arsenal of China & Pakistan or more. The services should be integrated by creating unified functional, theater & support commands lead by a CDS.

  6. Nehru’ s blunder- letting China takeover Tibet. USA WOULD HAVE RUSHED TO ASSIST INDIA FOR PREVENTING IT. Mc Mohan line Agreement was signed between India and Tibet. China does not recognise this as they stress that Tibet was not empowered to sign it. Thus, with Nehru’s blunder , the buffer does not exist and we have the Dragon on our doorstep!!

  7. China is a hegemon with declared Liebensraum plans for which it has been gearing up systematically and strategically. An activity that has been ignored in India with the same struthonianism as Islam. India has been ruled by intellectual pygmies lacking in any vision beyond how to steal from the haves and the have nots for the have lots of the neo-aristocracy. The enormous political imperative to cover up every blunder and act of tyranny or plunder that does not gel with the “image” of the perpetrators has helped close the Indian mind to any form of progress or evolution towards becoming a nation or a democracy. The Indian Republic is constructed to benefit and confer victory on India’s enemies. China will be an extension from the kleptocracy of the last 65 years. A new partner, so to say.

More Comments Loader Loading Comments