Line of Actual Control (LAC) : India & Tibet Border Updates

[Defc0n]

We have another round of meetings between the Indian and the Chinese general.

Top Indian, Chinese generals to meet tomorrow as talks enter crucial stage

The meeting is expected to focus on the Finger Area and the strategic Depsang plains, with a complex disengagement process that began after previous military talks on June 30 progressing in Galwan Valley, Hot Springs and Gogra, said one of the officials cited above.

www.hindustantimes.com

Another marathon meeting for moving the Chinese beyond F8?

 

[Cole_phelps]

China denies burial to its soldiers killed in Galwan clash: Report

According to the US intelligence assessment, China is not accepting that its soldiers have been killed in the showdown in order to cover up an episode that Beijing appears to consider a blunder, reported the U.S. News.

China denies burial to its soldiers killed in Galwan clash: Report

Even after the one month of the incident, China has still not disclosed how many of its soldiers were killed in the incident.

m.hindustantimes.com

 

[HariPrasad]

India-china relations are at the edge of the cliff. china can't do anything now, whatever India does. china is already on its knees. See the statement their stooge sitting in Delhi is sending out for peace and reconciliation and talking of trust and avoiding trade barriers. To sum it up, PHAT gaye hai, china ki.

Actually, China should be thankful to India because India let it go without utter humiliation. Had India decided to humiliate China , this was the golden opportunity. India let it go and China should be thankful to India for that.

 

[Defc0n]

Actually, China should be thankful to India because India let it go without utter humiliation. Had India decided to humiliate China , this was the golden opportunity. India let it go and China should be thankful to India for that.

And we Indians always miss out on golden opportunities. Kashmir could have been settled in 71, 99 - we missed.
Things could have been lot different last year Feb - We missed.
Now we could have humiliated China - We missed.

The question is, what will be the price that we pay for having missed this opportunity.

 

[randomradio]

Actually, China should be thankful to India because India let it go without utter humiliation. Had India decided to humiliate China , this was the golden opportunity. India let it go and China should be thankful to India for that.

And we Indians always miss out on golden opportunities. Kashmir could have been settled in 71, 99 - we missed.
Things could have been lot different last year Feb - We missed.
Now we could have humiliated China - We missed.

The question is, what will be the price that we pay for having missed this opportunity.

It's better to blackmail and extract concessions than humiliate and deal with the backlash.

Anyway, the story is not over yet. We have to wait for complete demobilisation of the Chinese from the area first, so the situation is still ongoing.

 

[Cole_phelps]

Actually, China should be thankful to India because India let it go without utter humiliation. Had India decided to humiliate China , this was the golden opportunity. India let it go and China should be thankful to India for that.

Let's not mistake fistfights with war. PLA's rocket force/arty poses credible threat. They backed off because any misadventure will result in death of many Han soldiers which a nation that hasn't been in conflict for four decades is afraid of.

 

[Aurora]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1283009595242209286

@randomradio sir, please refer to our earlier discussion.

 

[Defc0n]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1283038342532268035

 

[randomradio]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1283009595242209286

@randomradio sir, please refer to our earlier discussion.

This was expected. Nothing unusual, but it's far too small of a punishment.

And no sir please.

 

[Aurora]

This was expected. Nothing unusual, but it's far too small of a punishment.

Well your past statements were not that optimistic for this step. Nevertheless it has started and more would come soon.
Btw I don't consider this a small punishment, given the ambition of Chinese to rule the world through 5g networking. You should check how much China got irked by the same step of USA.

 

[randomradio]

Well your past statements were not that optimistic for this step. Nevertheless it has started and more would come soon.
Btw I don't consider this a small punishment, given the ambition of Chinese to rule the world through 5g networking. You should check how much China got irked by the same step of USA.

Banning Huawei is nothing. I'm referring to taking extremely aggressive economic steps that can actually hurt China. Removing them from the 5G ecosystem from a few advanced countries doesn't hurt China, Huawei has plenty of other countries buying their stuff, and that's most of the world.

 

[_Anonymous_]

Banning Huawei is nothing. I'm referring to taking extremely aggressive economic steps that can actually hurt China. Removing them from the 5G ecosystem from a few advanced countries doesn't hurt China, Huawei has plenty of other countries buying their stuff, and that's most of the world.

Partially true. The big bucks are always in developed nations or ones with substantial populations. The rest make up the numbers.

 

[Aurora]

Banning Huawei is nothing. I'm referring to taking extremely aggressive economic steps that can actually hurt China. Removing them from the 5G ecosystem from a few advanced countries doesn't hurt China, Huawei has plenty of other countries buying their stuff, and that's most of the world.

Partially true. The big bucks are always in developed nations or ones with substantial populations. The rest make up the numbers.

I agree and wanted to say the same. And in addition, with Huawe ban Chinese have lost their biggest spying tool. I can't understand why are you underestimating the importance of Huawe for Chinese.

 

[randomradio]

Partially true. The big bucks are always in developed nations or ones with substantial populations. The rest make up the numbers.

You are confusing hardware supplier with service provider. The service provide requires richer customers. Huawei requires more territory to cover.

The hardware supply depends on the size of the geography of a country. Like Brazil will require more hardware than Switzerland, although Switzerland's per capita is much greater.

Different story if Huawei's main goal is to steal information, then the small financial profit from just selling hardware becomes irrelevant.

 

[randomradio]

I agree and wanted to say the same. And in addition, with Huawe ban Chinese have lost their biggest spying tool. I can't understand why are you underestimating the importance of Huawe for Chinese.

Because, logically, most of the information worth stealing will not be on Chinese networks. Companies will ensure that, especialyl since advanced economies have at least 1 or more service providers that are not using Huawei. It's just the local population using Huawei that will be under risk, but govts already understand that risk and some are willing to take such risks, because sensible people will avoid Huawei networks in the first place.

 

[_Anonymous_]

You are confusing hardware supplier with service provider. The service provide requires richer customers. Huawei requires more territory to cover.

The hardware supply depends on the size of the geography of a country. Like Brazil will require more hardware than Switzerland, although Switzerland's per capita is much greater.

Different story if Huawei's main goal is to steal information, then the small financial profit from just selling hardware becomes irrelevant.

It's your assumption that I'm confusing issues here. I clearly mentioned what I did as developing nations in Asia, Africa or Latin America with sparse populations will go in for vanilla 5g services. Translation - hardware & software solutions for such packages don't enjoy decent bottom lines.

Those with larger populations like India, Indonesia, Nigeria or Brazil have either decided against Huawei internally ( as is the case with India) or are under tremendous pressure by the US, their own apprehensions not withstanding.

Most of the developed world which is likely to see the full rollout of all the benefits of 5g with up to date networks have already barred Huawei / are in the process of doing so. That's where the money lies as far as hardware & attendant software goes.

What you think I'm referring to are the multitude of services that 5g can offer without considering whether the paying clientele of such developing nations can afford / would even want the full spectrum of benefits 5g offers.

It's based on the purchasing power of such customers that government design their policy & fix spectrum fees & service providers decide their procurement policies. Add to this the ability of the banking sector in those respective developing countries to bankroll such enterprises especially in a post wuhan virus world. In the pre Wuhan virus world China thru it's PSB's would be willing to underwrite & bankroll such ventures. Given growing apprehensions of their debt trap diplomacy, most developing nations who would be wary then would certainly be reluctant now given how widespread & infamous their modus operandi has become.

 

[randomradio]

It's your assumption that I'm confusing issues here. I clearly mentioned what I did as developing nations in Asia, Africa or Latin America with sparse populations will go in for vanilla 5g services. Translation - hardware & software solutions for such packages don't enjoy decent bottom lines.

Those with larger populations like India, Indonesia, Nigeria or Brazil have either decided against Huawei internally ( as is the case with India) or are under tremendous pressure by the US, their own apprehensions not withstanding.

Most of the developed world which is likely to see the full rollout of all the benefits of 5g with up to date networks have already barred Huawei / are in the process of doing so. That's where the money lies as far as hardware & attendant software goes.

What you think I'm referring to are the multitude of services that 5g can offer without considering whether the paying clientele of such developing nations can afford / would even want the full spectrum of benefits 5g offers.

It's based on the purchasing power of such customers that government design their policy & fix spectrum fees & service providers decide their procurement policies. Add to this the ability of the banking sector in those respective developing countries to bankroll such enterprises especially in a post wuhan virus world. In the pre Wuhan virus world China thru it's PSB's would be willing to underwrite & bankroll such ventures. Given growing apprehensions of their debt trap diplomacy, most developing nations who would be wary then would certainly be reluctant now given how widespread & infamous their modus operandi has become.

I don't think there are any benefits to Huawei beyond setting up the network. And what you are talking about, the other benefits, that would apply to Chinese software like apps. Regardless of whether it's Huawei or Nokia, the apps are where the money is after all, where the real difference between developed and developing actually shows up. India's 5G network alone will be many, many times more expensive than UK's, but Tiktok should be making more money in the UK than in India.

What I'm talking about is even if Huawei has been banned, it's not a loss to China's existing economy and is a blip in the future of the Chinese economy. What I want to see is actual changes that result in immediate punitive effects, like banning the apps, banning the entry of Chinese infrastructure companies and so on. Europe can even punish China to the advantage of their direct competitors through the use of tariffs and preventing the routing of Chinese goods through a third country. Banning all the Confucius Institutes is also important. Stuff that may hurt the Europeans a bit, but does extreme harm to China at the same time.

Banning Huawei is nothing in comparison to what the Chinese have done in Hong Kong.

@Aurora
Until the Europeans do what I've pointed out above, it's all eyewash.

 

[Aurora]

@Aurora
Until the Europeans do what I've pointed out above, it's all eyewash.

What about sending an aircraft carrier in SCS? Do you consider it as a punitive action??
Btw I have already said it earlier in my posts that these things take time. Banning Huawe is just stater, more actions would follow soon.

 

[jetray]

I don't think there are any benefits to Huawei beyond setting up the network. And what you are talking about, the other benefits, that would apply to Chinese software like apps. Regardless of whether it's Huawei or Nokia, the apps are where the money is after all, where the real difference between developed and developing actually shows up. India's 5G network alone will be many, many times more expensive than UK's, but Tiktok should be making more money in the UK than in India.

What I'm talking about is even if Huawei has been banned, it's not a loss to China's existing economy and is a blip in the future of the Chinese economy. What I want to see is actual changes that result in immediate punitive effects, like banning the apps, banning the entry of Chinese infrastructure companies and so on. Europe can even punish China to the advantage of their direct competitors through the use of tariffs and preventing the routing of Chinese goods through a third country. Banning all the Confucius Institutes is also important. Stuff that may hurt the Europeans a bit, but does extreme harm to China at the same time.

Banning Huawei is nothing in comparison to what the Chinese have done in Hong Kong.

@Aurora
Until the Europeans do what I've pointed out above, it's all eyewash.

huawei is not just selling hardware it is selling complete ecosystem of services and hardware is just part of it. It is trying to become cisco of mobile networking world. Based on your understanding we should completely write off intel/amd and only microsoft/facebook should be considered important. Other chinese companies will ride on huawei's offering and will rival western companies, thats the reason why US does not want to give huawei a foot hold in the industry to grow further.

 

[randomradio]

What about sending an aircraft carrier in SCS? Do you consider it as a punitive action??

Of course not. That's just posturing. Power projection.

Btw I have already said it earlier in my posts that these things take time. Banning Huawe is just stater, more actions would follow soon.

I hope they do that. Because such things, where laws are changed, need quick action, or people will get bored and their interest will fade away.