It is time that India be taught a second lesson: China
Shares
BEIJING: The public’s patience is running short with India’s Doklam transgression. Nothing can stand in the way of China’s and Chinese people’s dignity.
As India continues down this intransigent path, perhaps it is time that it be taught a second lesson. Their troops in Doklam could either withdraw voluntarily, be captured or may be killed when border disputes escalate, Liu Youfa, China’s former consul general in Mumbai, made the above comments in an appearance on China Global Television Network (CGTN).
As always, India’s logic of reasoning on this matter is as feeble as its troops on the ground. India’s position is that Doklam is territory in dispute between China and Bhutan, and it has been invited there by Bhutan, its protectorate state.
Furthermore, it claims China’s road construction in Doklam poses a strategic threat to the “chicken’s neck,” referring to the 27-kilometer-wide Siliguri Corridor to the south of Doklam that connects the northeastern part of India with the rest of the country.
Chicken’s neck or giraffe’s neck, who cares? Why would a peaceful China care about the road condition in another country when its only purpose is to improve its own road conditions?
This road in Doklam has been there for at least a decade under firm Chinese administration, and this time China is merely trying to do some asphalt patching work in order to facilitate better logistics support to its border posts.
No matter what vassalage relationship India maintains with Bhutan, it baffles this author that India has the courage to transgress another country on its behalf. And in this case, Indian troops even entered into Doklam from the China-Sikkim border. Well, if this kind of logic holds, a third country can certainly enter into Kashmir.
Now let’s also bear in mind that India has a history of harboring the Dalai Lama in Dharamsala as a strategic counter-China ploy. Underneath the Dalai Lama’s façade of peace, there lies a trace of violence at least half a century old. Immediately after he fled to India in 1959, the Dalai Lama became the CIA’s henchman in engaging in a terrorist guerrilla war on China.
In more recent years, the Tibetan Youth Congress, the armed wing of the Dalai Lama’s regime, instigated several violent riots and is responsible for several terrorist bombings in China. In a way, India is actively harboring terrorism against the Chinese.
To such an unruly neighbor, China should reciprocate in a language that India can understand. The famous or infamous India bravado is never backed up by substance in its history with China.
If memory is short on the Indian side, perhaps there should be a second lesson. China is embarking on a historic mission to be a peaceful, prosperous and powerful nation as it has been in history.
No government in the world can stand still doing nothing while its borders are being violated.
As India continues down this intransigent path, perhaps it is time that it be taught a second lesson. Their troops in Doklam could either withdraw voluntarily, be captured or may be killed when border disputes escalate, Liu Youfa, China’s former consul general in Mumbai, made the above comments in an appearance on China Global Television Network (CGTN).
As always, India’s logic of reasoning on this matter is as feeble as its troops on the ground. India’s position is that Doklam is territory in dispute between China and Bhutan, and it has been invited there by Bhutan, its protectorate state.
Furthermore, it claims China’s road construction in Doklam poses a strategic threat to the “chicken’s neck,” referring to the 27-kilometer-wide Siliguri Corridor to the south of Doklam that connects the northeastern part of India with the rest of the country.
Chicken’s neck or giraffe’s neck, who cares? Why would a peaceful China care about the road condition in another country when its only purpose is to improve its own road conditions?
This road in Doklam has been there for at least a decade under firm Chinese administration, and this time China is merely trying to do some asphalt patching work in order to facilitate better logistics support to its border posts.
That a public infrastructure project in one country can be viewed as a strategic threat to another, and worse yet be used as an excuse warranting an invasion, is unprecedented in recent human history.
But the Indians have misunderstood their audience. China is no Sikkim or Bhutan, where India’s hegemonic tactics have worked. “We wouldn’t have the patience to listen to that kind of wanton robber logic”.
But the Indians have misunderstood their audience. China is no Sikkim or Bhutan, where India’s hegemonic tactics have worked. “We wouldn’t have the patience to listen to that kind of wanton robber logic”.
No matter what vassalage relationship India maintains with Bhutan, it baffles this author that India has the courage to transgress another country on its behalf. And in this case, Indian troops even entered into Doklam from the China-Sikkim border. Well, if this kind of logic holds, a third country can certainly enter into Kashmir.
Now let’s also bear in mind that India has a history of harboring the Dalai Lama in Dharamsala as a strategic counter-China ploy. Underneath the Dalai Lama’s façade of peace, there lies a trace of violence at least half a century old. Immediately after he fled to India in 1959, the Dalai Lama became the CIA’s henchman in engaging in a terrorist guerrilla war on China.
In more recent years, the Tibetan Youth Congress, the armed wing of the Dalai Lama’s regime, instigated several violent riots and is responsible for several terrorist bombings in China. In a way, India is actively harboring terrorism against the Chinese.
To such an unruly neighbor, China should reciprocate in a language that India can understand. The famous or infamous India bravado is never backed up by substance in its history with China.
If memory is short on the Indian side, perhaps there should be a second lesson. China is embarking on a historic mission to be a peaceful, prosperous and powerful nation as it has been in history.
