T 大字体2017-08-12 10:16:52 五毛网
sparky_sparky_boom 8分 10天前
There's also another scenario where a Chinese attack through the Chumbi valley is useless for cutting off the Indian northeast. If India can secure transit through Bangladesh, through treaty or force, then Chinese forces would have to cut off a much wider strip across Bangladesh, impossible with only Chinese infantry facing Indian tanks on flat ground.
Considering Bangladesh is smaller and weaker than India, they probably could force passage if necessary. I'm of the opinion that cutting off and holding the Northeast is more likely than not to fail. The recent dispute over Doklam probably isn't part of some larger plan. More likely some poor Chinese schmucks got sent up to pave a road they completely thought was in their country and accidentally sparked a standoff.
insipid-fauna 8分 10天前
Problem is going through Bangaldesh to NE India means going across the Jamuna river, and the nearest bridge crossing is ~250 km south of the trijunction area. India would need to secure safe passage through Bangladesh by political means, forcing through Bangladesh a la Blitzkreig style would destroy any goodwill India has with the US (unless China launched an unwarranted offensive). The Siliguri Corridor appears to be a natural chokepoint, otherwise I'm not sure why India is getting so worked up over Doklam.
The recent dispute over Doklam probably isn't part of some larger plan.
The Chinese rarely do anything in international affairs unless they have some greater plan. This would be a rare exception rather than the rule.
sparky_sparky_boom 8分 10天前
If China were to use the Doklam plateau high ground, it would be during an attack. So I doubt any Indian violation of Bangladesh's border would be looked upon that badly. India's not going to randomly cross Bangladesh in peacetime. The fact that Chinese forces on Doklam might force India to cross Bangladesh explains why India wants to keep Chinese forces off, but I have doubts now about the value of Doklam for China or an invasion plan for the Northeast if the Siligiri corridor could be easily bypassed.
I'm not convinced the PRC is always capable of operating with all its parts in concert without ever making a mistake. That's on the level of accussing the CIA being behind every negative event to happen to the US's rivals. No point attributing events to malice when it can also be attributed to error.
insipid-fauna 5分 10天前
If China were to use the Doklam plateau high ground, it would be during an attack. So I doubt any Indian violation of Bangladesh's border would be looked upon that badly. India's not going to randomly cross Bangladesh in peacetime. The fact that Chinese forces on Doklam might force India to cross Bangladesh explains why India wants to keep Chinese forces off, but I have doubts now about the value of Doklam for China if the Siligiri corridor could be easily bypassed.
Agreed. I have my doubts as well.
That's on the level of accussing the CIA being behind every negative event to happen to the US's rivals.
False equivalence. The CIA doesn't have authority over the behavior of its US rivals, while the CPC/PLA has authority over its own soldiers. I have extraordinary doubts the expansion of a road in contested territory, and with China reportedly providing a statement to Bhutan and India prior to road construction that they would proceed to build the road, was done by some rogue company of engineers. You don't have to look deeply that China is making deals with its other neighboring countries either.
sparky_sparky_boom 3分 10天前*
If your source is correct and that China asked for permission before starting construction, and only started after receiving no objection, then it seems like they weren't expecting Indian opposition and were blindsided by it. Not really behavior planned to raise tensions at this particular point in time. More likely that they were expecting routine maintenance after notifying neighbors.
Of course, we're running off of rumors at this point. I'm still inclined to believe that large organizations are difficult to control due to many moving parts, personnel interactions, and inner political struggles. Even something that looks as united as the CPC from the outside isn't infallible and probably makes errors even a quarter of the time.
loscrimmage 18分 11天前
That seems to be India propaganda. While it is a remote possibility, I can't see any interests from the Chinese side for actually implementing it. In short, India is not that important.
devils_advocate8 0分 11天前
In short, India is not that important.
Really? This is your conclusion? The only peer in Asia that can rival China both economically and militarily, one which shares a border where they’ve already had a war and has $60B worth of trade imports from China isn’t important for China? You’re either seriously misinformed or downright delusional.
That seems to be India propaganda. While it is a remote possibility, I can’t see any interests from the Chinese side for actually implementing it.
Would you care elaborating why this might be Indian propaganda? It’s well documented that this region is strategically important for both India and China. Just because you can’t see why it’s important for the Chinese, doesn’t mean it’s propaganda.
id815 17分 10天前*
The only peer in Asia that can rival China both economically
India has a lower GDP than France
India still relies on Russian tech which is already starting to fall behind China's indigenous tech in several areas.
Russia and Japan are the only 2 countries in Asia that can arguably be considered "peers" of China (not even really) and India isn't even in THAT league.
The only comparable thing India has to China is its population.
Ali_Safdari 3分 10天前
Lower nominal GDP than France. By PPP terms, India is the third largest, at around 9.5 trillion dollars; which, however, is still less than half of that of China.
And yes, India does rely primarily on Russian tech, only military. Apart from Russian nuclear reactors, not much of Russian tech and products are used in India. Also, what point are you trying to make?
id815 10分 10天前*
Seems like people like to pick measures to paint a picture they want to tell. Why use PPP over nominal when comparing the spending power between 2 economies? Using PPP is especially absurd when discussing GDP and military together, seeing as a large proportion of Indian money would be spent on Russian military equipment bought on an open market. I'll paste my other reply in this thread below.
PPP GDP isn't a good measure of economic power that a nation can leverage on the world stage compared to Nominal GDP. Nominal GDP shows the total productive output of a country indexed to USD which provides a better base for comparison than PPP, which adjusts for the cost of living in different countries. While adjusting for the cost of living matters when looking at individual well-being in these countries, in the context of the world stage where many different countries trade on an open market, Nominal GDP is a better measure at how much "ammunition" / spending power each economy has.
I didn't really have a point. I was just refuting OP's point about India being the only "peer" / "rival" that can challenge China, and we had a little debate over what "challenge" actually meant.
Ali_Safdari 2分 9天前
I agree on both your points. India isn't a peer of China, and it'll need atleast 2 decades of the current growth rate to reach China's current nGDP. In the distant future, perhaps both the countries will be on an equal footing, now they definately aren't peers.