Archive for ‘Defence’

21/07/2013

Kashmir militants rebuild their lives as hopes of a lasting peace grow

The Observer: “Shabir Ahmed Dar has come home. His children play under the walnut trees where he once played. His father, white-bearded and thin now, watches them. The village of Degoom, the cluster of traditional brick-and-wood houses in Kashmir where Dar grew up, is still reached by a dirt road and hay is still hung from the branches of the soaring chinar trees to dry.

Shabir Ahmed Dar with one of his children

But Dar has changed, even if Degoom has not. It is 22 years since he left the village to steal over the “line of control” (LoC), the de facto border separating the Indian and Pakistani parts of this long-disputed former princely state high in the Himalayan foothills. Along with a dozen or so other teenagers, he hoped to take part in the insurgency which pitted groups of young Muslim Kashmiris enrolled in Islamist militant groups, and later extremists from Pakistan too, against Indian security forces.

“I went because everyone else was going. The situation was bad here. I had my beliefs, my dream for my homeland. I was very young,” he said, sitting in the room where he had slept as a child.

The conflict had only just begun when he left. Over the next two decades, an estimated 50,000 soldiers, policemen, militants and, above all, ordinary people were to die. Dar’s aim had been to “create a true Islamic society” in Kashmir. This could only be achieved by accession to Pakistan or independence, he believed.

But once across the LoC, even though he spent only a few months with the militant group he had set out to join and never took part in any fighting, he was unable to return. “I was stuck there. I made a new life. I married and found work. I didn’t think I would ever come back here,” Dar said.

But now the 36-year-old has finally come home, with his Pakistani-born wife and three children. He is one of 400 former militants who have taken advantage of a new “rehabilitation” policy launched by the youthful chief minister of the state, Omar Abdullah.

Dar’s father heard of the scheme and convinced his son to return last year. “I am an old man. I wanted to see my son and grandchildren before I die. I wanted him to have his share of our land,” said Dar senior, who is 70.

The scheme is an indication of the changes in this beautiful, battered land. In recent years, economic growth in India has begun to benefit Kashmir, the country’s only Muslim-majority state. At the same time, despite a series of spectacular attacks on security forces by militants in recent months, violence has fallen to its lowest levels since the insurgency broke out in the late 1980s. The two phenomena are connected, many observers say.

It is this relative calm that has allowed Dar and the others to return – and allows even some hardened veterans who have renounced violence to live unmolested. “A few years ago the [Indian intelligence] agencies would have shot this down because they would have seen it as another move to infiltrate [militants from Pakistan],” Abdullah, the chief minister, said.

The scheme is not, however, an amnesty. “If there are cases against them they will still be arrested [and] prosecuted … Largely this scheme has been taken up by those who have not carried out any acts of terrorism. Either they never came [across the LoC], or if they came we never knew about it,” Abdullah said.”

via Kashmir militants rebuild their lives as hopes of a lasting peace grow | World news | The Observer.

19/07/2013

Strike Force Would Allow ‘War on Two Fronts’

WSJ: “The Indian government this week reportedly paved the way for the creation of a new military corps of 50,000 troops near its border with China. If correct, analysts say this is a sign that New Delhi, which has been largely focused on its frontier with Pakistan, is now shifting its attention to the long, disputed Sino-Indian boundary.

Government sources were quoted by the Press Trust of India as saying a new mountain strike corps costing nearly $11 billion over seven years, was approved by India’s cabinet committee on security Wednesday. The committee is headed by India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

The force will be headquartered at Panagarh, in the eastern state of West Bengal, the news agency reported. Attempts to confirm these reports with India’s ministries of defense and external affairs were not successful.

The creation of a strike corps would give India thousands of war-ready soldiers, trained and equipped to respond rapidly to a military threat, stationed close to the border between India and China, known as the Line of Actual Control.

Analysts say it would take five to seven years for such a force to be formed fully, as large numbers of soldiers would need to be recruited and trained for combat at high altitudes and in mountainous terrains.

“The process will be incremental,” said Srikanth Kondapalli, a professor in Chinese studies at the New-Delhi based Jawaharlal Nehru University. “There won’t be large-scale training, because there is no immediate threat.”

For decades, relations between India and China have been characterized by mistrust. The tensions boiled over into a war between the two in 1962, which China won by gaining control over a large swathe of Indian territory known as Aksai China.

Beijing is still in control of the 38,000 square kilometers of land, but Indian maps show Aksai Chin as a part of Jammu and Kashmir, it’s northernmost state. China also claims 90,000 square kilometers of land in Arunachal Pradesh, a state in India’s northeast.

Neither nation has shown any inclination to return to armed conflict since, but India’s decision to create a strike corps – which analysts say has been in the offing for over two years – reflects New Delhi’s growing concern that Beijing is becoming increasingly assertive in its territorial claims.

via Strike Force Would Allow ‘War on Two Fronts’ – India Real Time – WSJ.

03/06/2013

Nuclear weapons: India keeps pace with Pakistan, but focuses on China

Times of India: “China, India, and Pakistan all added 10 to 20 nuclear weapons to their arsenal last year even as the top four nuclear nations — US, Russia, UK and France — appear determined to retain their nuclear arsenals indefinitely even if they didn’t add to their inventory, the Swedish arms watchdog Sipri said in its 2013 handbook released this weekend.

NPT Nuclear Weapon States (China, France, Russ...

NPT Nuclear Weapon States (China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, US) Non-NPT Nuclear Weapon States (India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan) States accused of having nuclear weapons programs (Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia) States formerly possessing nuclear weapons program (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Sipri’s world nuclear forces chart showed India bumping up its nuclear warheads from 80-100 in 2012 to 90-110 in 2013, keeping pace with Pakistan, which went from 90-110 weapons to 110-120. China meantime went from 240 nuclear weapons in 2012 to 250 in 2013, while France and UK froze their arsenals at 300 and 225 weapons respectively, as did Israel at 80 weapons.

Russia and the USA were the only two countries reducing their inventories of strategic nuclear weapons under the terms of the Treaty on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (New START) as well as retiring ageing and obsolescent weapons. However, Sipri said, they, along with the three other recognized nuclear powers, France, Britain and China, are either deploying new nuclear weapon delivery systems or have announced programs to do so, and appear determined to retain their nuclear arsenals indefinitely.

As a result, although the total number of nuclear weapons in the world dropped from approximately 19000 in 2012 to 17265 in 2013, there was little to inspire hope that the nuclear weapon-possessing states are genuinely willing to give up their nuclear arsenals, the Sipri report said.”

via Nuclear weapons: India keeps pace with Pakistan, but focuses on China – The Times of India.

14/05/2013

* India and China; making up, but what about trade?

FT: “Salman Khurshid, India’s foreign minister, is back from a trip to China last week, happy to see the end of a tense stand-off over a long-running border dispute. Settling that issue will re-open the way for a planned visit by Chinese Premier Li Keqiang to India and allow the two countries to concentrate on the big topic on Khurshid’s agenda: trade.

But here, too, relations between the region’s big powers are not entirely friendly.

Back in November 2011, India and China set a target for bilateral trade of $100bn for 2015. That’s quite a leap from $2.3bn a decade ago and marks a concrete step in bringing the two nations closer together.

But the balance of trade is strongly in China’s favour. Now Kurshid has put the November 2011 agreement “on pause” until the imbalance is resolved.

According to India’s department of commerce, India’s exports to China in April to December 2012 were worth $9.7bn. In the same period, China’s exports to India were worth $41.2bn – a bilateral trade deficit for India of $31.5bn, nearly a quarter of India’s entire trade deficit in the period.

Khurshid claimed not to have minced his words:

We said that let the trade imbalance be addressed upfront as an urgent priority, and then of course we can move to the next stage which is the regional trading arrangement.

What does the minister want from China? One target is better market access, especially for India’s IT and pharmaceuticals companies. Indian business leaders complain that exports to China would be much greater if China’s big state owned enterprises could be persuaded to source from foreign suppliers.

But others say a lack of competitiveness among Indian manufacturers contributes to the problem.

“China has a very competitive manufacturing sector that is able to produce at a large scale pretty efficiently and for reasonable prices,” says Louis Kuijs, chief China economist at RBS.

“Sometimes we would be inclined to think there is a lot of [Chinese] government policy behind this. People point to the subsidies that China’s government has given to industries in the past and companies having preferential access to loans. But in the bigger scheme of things, those subsidies aren’t the driving force. China is a bit ahead in industrialisation and has becomes very competitive globally.”

Kuijs doesn’t think this is about to change. Chinese manufacturers do good business in India in both consumer goods and capital goods. And he takes the view that, despite the current cyclical slowdown, both consumption and infrastructure investment will remain robust in India, so demand for Chinese products will continue to grow.

A little tinkering on a calculator provides a bit of good news for Indian trade, however. According to data from the World Trade Organization, India’s global merchandise exports grew faster than China’s between 2005 and 2012. Over the seven-year period, India’s exports grew at an average 18.3 per cent a year, against a figure of 16.3 per cent for China and 9.4 per cent for the world as a whole.

So, Indian exports are growing relatively quickly. But China’s lower growth comes from a far higher base. In 2012, China exported goods worth more than $2tn while India’s exports were worth $293bn. Even with their faster rate of growth, it will take a long time for India’s exporters to catch up on China’s lead.”

via India and China; making up, but what about trade? | beyondbrics.

11/05/2013

* India, China working on Border Cooperation Agreement: Khurshid

The Hindu: “Mr. Khurshid visited China in the backdrop of the Chinese incursion in Daulat Beg Oldi.

External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid speaking to the reporters after after meeting former Railways Minister Pawan Kumar Bansal at his residence in New Delhi on Saturday. Photo: PTI

Against the backdrop of China’s recent incursion in Ladakh, External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid on Saturday said the two countries are working on a new Border Defence Cooperation Agreement.

Mr. Khurshid, just back from his visit to Beijing, said the two sides had underlined that the incidents like the recent incursion in Daulat Beg Oldi should not happen and agreed that this issue should not come in way of improving ties.

Mr. Khurshid told reporters here that special representatives of India and China will meet in a couple of months to discuss in detail the issues related to boundary. “China has proposed sometime back a proposal for Border Defence Cooperation Agreement… We have also given our suggestions,” he said.

On the recent incursion of 19 km into India’s territory by Chinese troops, he said, “we did not do any post-mortem or aportion blame.” He expressed satisfaction that the mechanisms in place worked well to resolve the stand off.

On the contentious issues which could be raised during the visit of Chinese premier Li Keqiang, Mr. Khurshid said, “there are no prickly issues, issues of major differences which can be seen as obstacles.” He said MoUs would be signed during the Chinese premier’s visit and some during Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s subsequent visit to Beijing later this year.

“This is for the first time since 1954 that a two way visit by the two Prime Ministers of the two countries in the same year,” he said.”

via India, China working on Border Cooperation Agreement: Khurshid – The Hindu.

11/05/2013

* Indian indigenous aircraft carrier to be launched in August: Antony

Times of India: “Indian Navy‘s indigenously-built aircraft carrier would be launched on August 12 this year, while INS Vikramaditya (purchased from Russia) will arrive before the end of 2013, Union defence minister A K Antony said here on Saturday.

“INS Vikramaditya is going to be a reality, as promised the ship would be delivered before the end of this year,” Antony told reporters after the commissioning of fighter aircraft MiG29K into Navy at INS Hansa here.

“While on one side Vikramaditya is coming this year, on August 12 we are going to launch indigenous aircraft carrier at Cochin,” he said, without elaborating further.

The carrier when it was Admiral Gorshkov

The carrier when it was Admiral Gorshkov (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Asserting that the country was giving a thrust to modernisation of defence forces, Antony said, “Navy modernisation is one area where we are going fast-paced now.

“Almost all the navies of important countries want close cooperation with the Indian Navy,” he said, adding that “Indian Navy is well-prepared, most modern and (one of) the most capable navies of the world.

“(Over) Last many years, there has been well-planned induction wherein we are replacing old platforms and adding new ones,” he said.”

via Indigenous aircraft carrier to be launched in August: Antony – The Times of India.

07/05/2013

* Thunder out of China

It is most confusing for this state of affairs when the country continues to declare at every opportunioy that it has peaceful intentions and wants to co-exist peacefully with everyone, especially its neighbours.

The Economist: “FOR an emerging power that makes much of the peacefulness of its rise, China is engaged in what looks suspiciously like aggression on an alarming number of fronts. India says Chinese soldiers have set up camp 19km (12 miles) on its side of the “line of actual control” (LAC) that separates Ladakh in its state of Jammu & Kashmir from China, in the absence of an agreed border. Japan reports that Chinese maritime surveillance vessels are every day circling the disputed Senkaku or Diaoyu islands in the East China Sea. And on April 26th China demanded that the Philippines “withdraw all its nationals and facilities” from a number of islands and reefs in the South China Sea, where they have been, in some cases, for decades. In all these cases China can with some justification claim it is responding to provocation. That, however, is scant comfort to its increasingly anxious neighbours.

Of the three territorial disputes it is the rekindling of the one with India that comes most as a surprise. Two long sectors of the border are contested. In the east, China briefly occupied part of what is now the state of Arunachal Pradesh, south of Tibet, in a bloody punitive war in 1962. In the west, the Aksai Chin, a high plateau the size of Switzerland, is occupied by China but claimed by India as part of Ladakh. In both sectors, patrols from each side often stray into what the other sees as its territory. They do not, however, pitch tents, as China’s soldiers have in this incursion. It is the most serious confrontation on either end of the border since 1986. After that stand-off, the two countries agreed to set the quarrel to one side, in an endless negotiation on the demarcation of the LAC, as they concentrated on building trade and other ties. A drive a decade ago to reach a political settlement soon ran into the sand. But neither side has an interest in forcing the issue.

Now above all, when China is embroiled in the other disputes, and the region is tense because of North Korea’s erratic bellicosity, it seems incomprehensible that China should want to resurrect yet another squabble. China of course denies it has done anything of the kind, insisting its soldiers are on its side of the LAC. It may, however, feel provoked. Ajai Shukla, an Indian defence analyst, has pointed out that the Indian army has been undertaking what he calls its “third surge towards the Sino-Indian border”. The previous two were in the late 1950s—leading to the 1962 war—and in 1986, leading to the present stalemate. Now, once again, says Mr Shukla, India has been “thickening” its presence in Arunachal Pradesh and in Aksai Chin, with more soldiers, weaponry and infrastructure.

So China may feel India is exploiting both the inexperience of its new leaders who took over last November, and the pressure China is under on other fronts. It may harbour similar suspicions about Japan and its “provocations” over what China calls the Diaoyu islands. Its patrols near the islands were prompted by Japan’s ignoring its warnings not to “nationalise” three of the islands by buying them from their private owner last September.

More recently—in late April—ten Japanese boats carrying about 80 right-wing activists sailed towards the islands. And members of the cabinet of Japan’s prime minister, Shinzo Abe, angered China by visiting the Yasukuni shrine—where high-ranking war criminals are among the enshrined war-dead. Part of China’s response was to reiterate that the Diaoyus are one of its “core interests”—the issues, like Taiwan and Tibet, over which it might go to war. In a joint communiqué signed by Barack Obama in 2009, America and China promised to respect each other’s core interests.

The demand directed at the Philippines, that it withdraw from disputed islands, was also a reaction—to the Philippines’ taking its dispute with China to the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea. China rightly points out that, although the law of the sea sets rules about the waters and exclusive economic zones around islands, it says nothing about sovereignty over them.

On that question, China seems intent on imposing its own view. In addition to verbal attacks on the Philippines, it this week started tourist cruises around the Paracel archipelago (Xisha in Chinese). This is still claimed by Vietnam, which was evicted by China from the islands in 1974. China’s rows with the Philippines and Vietnam have been the most active of its many disputes in the sea. But in late March it also antagonised Brunei and Malaysia, by sending a naval flotilla where those two nations have claims, at the southern tip of China’s expansive “nine-dashed line”, a vague cartographic claim dating from the 1930s.

Individually, China’s actions can be seen as pragmatic reactions to different pressures. But, taken together, they bring two dangers. First, they make China seem embarked on a concerted campaign to establish new “facts on the ground” (or water) to strengthen its position in future negotiations or conflicts. More likely, they show almost the opposite: that China’s foreign-policy chiefs lack the clout to impose a co-ordinated, calibrated response to coincidental provocations. Rather than picking off its adversaries one by one, China is taking them all on at once. The impression of an aggressive rising power is hard to shake off.”

via Banyan: Thunder out of China | The Economist.

06/05/2013

* India and China ‘pull back troops’ in disputed border area

At last, common-sense prevails.

BBC: “India and China have started pulling back troops from disputed territory near the two countries’ de facto border, India’s foreign ministry says.

Map of Kashmir

Soldiers were said to have set up camps facing each other on the ill-defined frontier in Ladakh region last month.

The two sides held a series of talks to resolve the row and on Sunday, agreed to withdraw the troops.

The two countries dispute several Himalayan border areas and fought a brief war in 1962.

Tensions flare up from time to time. They have held numerous rounds of border talks, but all have been unsuccessful so far.

A spokesperson for India’s foreign ministry, Syed Akbaruddin, told the BBC that India and China had agreed to pull their troops back to positions they held prior to the current stand-off, which began last month.

Meetings between border commanders were being held to confirm the arrangement, he added.

Indian officials had accused Chinese troops of straying 10km (six miles) into Indian territory on 15 April and putting up tents in the Depsang valley in Ladakh, in eastern Kashmir.

China had denied reports of an incursion.

The pull-out comes days ahead of Indian Foreign Minister Salman Khurshid‘s visit to China, ahead of a scheduled visit by Chinese Premier Li Keqiang to India.

Mr Khurshid is visiting China on 9 May, ahead of Mr Li’s visit on 20 May for his first overseas trip.”

via BBC News – India and China ‘pull back troops’ in disputed border area.

03/05/2013

* Seven key messages from India to China

Let us hope some of these seven messages are heard by Indian policy-makers.

30/04/2013

* Experts baffled by China-India border stand-off amid improving ties

SCMP: “It’s more than 5,000 metres above sea level, cold, inhospitable, uninhabited, with hardly any vegetation or wildlife in sight. Welcome to the icy desert wastelands of Daulat Beg Oldi, a forgotten pit stop on the Silk Road catapulted to overnight geopolitical fame as two nuclear neighbours vie for its possession in a dangerous game of tactical brinkmanship.

For two weeks now, Chinese and Indian soldiers have been standing eyeball to eyeball, barely 100 metres apart, at this easternmost point of the Karakoram Range on the western sector of the China-India border.

Both sides claim the land as their own in an unusually public show of mutual defiance that threatens to unhinge some of their newfound comity in an otherwise fraught relationship, and cast a shadow on Premier Li Keqiang‘s visit to India next month.

The trouble began when Indian media started reporting a “deep incursion” on April 15 in which a platoon of about 30 Chinese soldiers entered the Daulat Beg Oldi area in the Depsang Valley of eastern Ladakh in Indian-administered Kashmir.

Shrill media reports of Chinese incursions are not uncommon in India, where Sinophobia has been wired deep into the national psyche since a drubbing by China in a border war in 1962. Every time such reports appear, New Delhi’s stock response is that it’s a misunderstanding caused by “perceptual differences”. This time is no different.

A group of activists protest on Saturday against an alleged incursion two weeks ago by about 30 Chinese troops in the Daulat Beg Oldi area in eastern Ladakh of Indian-administered Kashmir. Photo: AP

India and China do not have a real border marked out on the ground as they never got around to negotiating one. What they follow is an undemarcated Line of Actual Control (LAC), but each side has its own perception of where that line actually lies. As a result, it is not uncommon for patrols to stray into each other’s territory. Years of painstaking talks have gone into creating an elaborate mechanism to prevent such transgressions from snowballing, keeping the peace for 25 years.

What is different this time is that none of the standard operating procedures that comprise this peace mechanism seem to be working. These procedures include waving banners to alert the other patrol if it is on the wrong side of the LAC, and meetings between local commanders. This time, two flag meetings have been held but the stalemate continues. New Delhi insists Chinese troops have entered 18 kilometres into Indian territory and must leave. Beijing maintains its soldiers are on the Chinese side of the LAC and won’t budge. And, in an alarming show of strength, both sides have dug in, pitching tents to strengthen their claims.

The confrontation has sent diplomats into overdrive to calm tempers before Li’s India visit as both sides have set much store by the trip. Bilateral trade, barely about US$3 billion in 2000 following decades of shutting each other out after the war, has now reached nearly US$80 billion, making China India’s largest trading partner. The aim is to reach US$100 billion by 2015, with both sides looking for greater access to each other’s markets. They are also increasingly working together in other areas, ranging from environment to energy security.

Sino-Indian relations are developing very quickly. Li’s visit will be his first foreign trip after taking office, and is in a complete break with protocol, showing the importance China attaches to relations with India,” says Ma Jiali, an India expert at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations in Beijing.

Li’s choice of India as his first port of call had created a burst of goodwill in India for its symbolism. Going by protocol, it was Indian Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh‘s turn to visit Beijing this year to reciprocate for former premier Wen Jiabao‘s tour in 2011.”

via Experts baffled by China-India border stand-off amid improving ties | South China Morning Post.

Law of Unintended Consequences

continuously updated blog about China & India

ChiaHou's Book Reviews

continuously updated blog about China & India

What's wrong with the world; and its economy

continuously updated blog about China & India