China’s View of South Asia and the Indian Ocean

[Ray]

Heritage's Dean Cheng offers these pointers in another 2010 analysis:



China's Indian Provocations Part of Broader Trend - Heritage Foundation - Sept 9, 2010.

***

Ray, you may also be interested in this speech by another "product of the Heritage Foundation":

Dinesh D'Souza Explains His Theory of the Obama Administration - Heritage Foundation - March 16, 2011.

The Economist has a take:

Against D'Souza - The Economist - Sept 30, 2010.

I find Dean Cheng's article very incisive and he has summed it up well.

India is in the process raising and inducting two Division to bolster its defences and to ensure that China does not enter Indian territory and lay physical claim to the Indian State of Arunachal, which they call South Tibet.
That apart, India has purchased some C17 and are in the process of purchasing more of these strategic lifters, as also purchasing US 155mm Light Howitzers.

I could not see Dinesh D'Souza's video in it entirety as it had problems of buffering and finally crashed. However, what I could see and hear, was totally embarrassing and proved my point that these are the types who proved more loyal to the King than the King himself!

I agree with the Economist.

[Ray]

These are links that could be read in conjunction.

The Myitsone dam project was being developed jointly by Burma and China at the head of the Irrawaddy river, the confluence of the Mali and N'Mai rivers in Kachin state, in an area currently the scene of conflict between government forces and ethnic minority insurgents.

The vast majority of the electricity produced on the dam would benefit China, and the dam had served to inflame growing anti-Chinese sentiment in Burma, our correspondent says......

"The people [are] really happy and welcome the decision made by President Thein Sein because it wasn't only [Aung San] Suu Kyi, let me remind you of that.

"It's the population, the whole Burmese who feel they belong to the culture heritage of the Irrawaddy river. They welcome the news."....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-15121801

Chinese mining company pulled out of what was to be Pakistan's largest foreign-investment deal because of security concerns, complicating Islamabad's effort to position its giant neighbor as an alternative to the U.S. as its main ally.


An official at China Kingho Group, one of China's largest private coal miners, said on Thursday it had backed out in August from a $19 billion deal in southern Sindh province due to concerns for its personnel after recent bombings in Pakistan's major cities.....

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...644602028.html

It is extraordinary that closest of allies of China are bucking the friendship when China alone has stood by them against all world opinion.

The issues of discontent in Africa is understandable and so is the problems in the South China Seas, but this is really unexplainable.

Is China losing her grip?

If so, why?

And yet, I believe that China is speedily attempting to link China with Afghanistan and some speculate a greater role of China to include taking over the vacuum cause by the US drawdown.

What exactly is China's gameplan when things are not going her way and that too in otherwise without doubt the closest friends of China.

Given the Xinjiang is a headache for China and the string of pearls an important strategic cog, with both Pakistan and Burma being obtuse, what unfettered harvest can China reap in these two countries and add another one to its kitty - Afghanistan?!

I might as well add that China is in the process of linking Bangladesh to Kunming via Myanmar by road and rail and building a deep sea port for Bangladesh.

What will be the strategic scenario in Asia Pacific?

[Dayuhan]

Given the Xinjiang is a headache for China and the string of pearls an important strategic cog, with both Pakistan and Burma being obtuse, what unfettered harvest can China reap in these two countries and add another one to its kitty - Afghanistan?!

What is there to harvest in Afghanistan, beyond misery and headaches that make Xinjiang look pale by comparison?

I see no reason for China to be even remotely interested in moving into Afghanistan, and many reasons why they would not. Why would they want to bite off the same gnarly lump that the Russians and Americans choked on?

[Ray]

What is there to harvest in Afghanistan, beyond misery and headaches that make Xinjiang look pale by comparison?

I see no reason for China to be even remotely interested in moving into Afghanistan, and many reasons why they would not. Why would they want to bite off the same gnarly lump that the Russians and Americans choked on?

Let me play the Devils Advocate to my own wondering as to what China will gain from Afghanistan.

The opening of Afghanistan’s first major railroad in August promises transformative economic and geopolitical changes that are yet to be fully understood. The recent completion of a railroad line from the Afghan-Uzbek border to Mazar-i-Sharif will be complemented by a railroad from Iran. Along with railroads planned by China and Pakistan, this will create economic synergies as Afghanistan is integrated with the railroads of its neighbors. Geopolitically, the Afghan railroads dovetail with China’s massive railroad program in Central Asia, Pakistan, and Iran. Further, as Iran, Pakistan, and Russia are hedging their bets on a U.S. troop withdrawal, railroads will strengthen their influence in Afghanistan. The railroad frenzy should be seen in this light.

These barriers are now breaking up. Afghanistan and its vicinity are being covered with railroads and will soon be plugged into the railroad networks of China, Russia, Pakistan, and the Middle East. The inauguration of Afghanistan’s first railroad on August 20-21, running between Hairaton bordering Uzbekistan and Mazar-i-Sharif in the north, is only the beginning of a wide-ranging railroad effort involving all regional powers and international development banks.

For example, an Iranian-funded railroad is being constructed from the Iranian town of Khaf to the western city of Herat, and the Chinese are planning a north-south railroad running from Tajikistan, via Afghanistan’s Aynak copper mine, to Pakistan. China is also planning a railroad line from Sher-Khan Bandar in Tajikistan via Mazar-i-Sharif to Herat, with a branch to the Turkmenistan Railroads line at Towraghondi. A second phase envisions a Chinese-funded line from Mazar-i-Sharif via Kabul and Jalalabad to Torkham near the Khyber Pass connecting Afghanistan and China. Pakistan, too, is looking at extending its Chaman line to Kandahar in southern Afghanistan.

http://www.cacianalyst.org/?q=node/5629/print

This is possible an indicator of Chinese interests to include Afghanistan.

Obviously China has an economic aim as also a strategic aim.

One should not take China's approach to issues to be executed in a similar manner as to what the USSR or US did or doing.

They would not have become such a huge Empire as is the Han landmass or what is China today, if they went about it in any other way than what they have done. The very fact that, notwithstanding the reality that it is a variety of peoples that the Hans conquered, 92% of their population claim that they are Hans.

If they increased their land mass by doing it the way others did, then Xinjiang and Tibet should have been burning, but they are not!

One has to see the manner in which they are increasing their strategic reach without stepping on any country's toes.

It is the Chinese way of doing things that one has to understand. This Chinese way of doing thing is called Yongxiabianyi in Manadrin. It is does not believe in muscle power and instead is based on a complex persuasive power.

Therefore, what is China's real intent?

[bourbon]

What is there to harvest in Afghanistan, beyond misery and headaches that make Xinjiang look pale by comparison?

I see no reason for China to be even remotely interested in moving into Afghanistan, and many reasons why they would not. Why would they want to bite off the same gnarly lump that the Russians and Americans choked on?

That's not the question to ask. The question to ask is what is there for China to harvest in Central Asia, South Asia, and the Middle East? And the answer that is - a lot. Afghanistan can be a spoiler in any of those endeavors.

No empire actually wants to go into Afghanistan, but they are forced into doing so in pursuit of greater objectives.

[Ken White]

No empire actually wants to go into Afghanistan, but they are forced into doing so in pursuit of greater objectives.

Or is that simply a way to appear to have an ability to harvest (or something...). Many empires have gone there, most discovered, belatedly, that it really wasn't worth the trouble and then went elsewhere to achieve their goals...

There are many better ways to attain objectives than by stirring up folks who live in mountains. That is always a bad idea.

[Dayuhan]

That's not the question to ask. The question to ask is what is there for China to harvest in Central Asia, South Asia, and the Middle East? And the answer that is - a lot. Afghanistan can be a spoiler in any of those endeavors.

No empire actually wants to go into Afghanistan, but they are forced into doing so in pursuit of greater objectives.

Agree with Ken. Afghanistan has little or no bearing on Chinese engagement in Central Asia and South Asia and none on the Middle East. There's no incentive for China to go in and every reason to stay out.

There are many better ways to attain objectives than by stirring up folks who live in mountains. That is always a bad idea.

Bein' one of them folks who live in the mountains, I have to agree...

[bourbon]

Afghanistan has little or no bearing on Chinese engagement in Central Asia and South Asia and none on the Middle East.

Really?

China wants a stable Central Asia, not least of all for the purposes of energy security, and domestic stability vis-a-vis Xinjiang. Afghanistan was a sanctuary and source of funding (via narcotics) for insurgencies in both Tajikistan and Uzbekistan during the 1990's. Instability in Afghanistan feeds instability in the CARs.

China wants to connect Pakistani ports (Gwadar) to western China through rail, road and pipeline. But Pakistan has no strategic depth with regard to its India front. Those connections would be disrupted in the advent of war with India since they are within easy striking distance. And this is to say nothing of Pakistan's own goal of maintaining control of Afghanistan for strategic depth. As the Sino-Pak partnership strengthens – so to will China's interest in Afghanistan.

With regard to the Middle East, China's principle interest is hydrocarbons and securing their transport. China aims to secure transport by opening up alternatives to Indian Ocean routes – namely through Central Asia and Pakistan (see above).