Dhat teri!

[coffee_rules]

USA showed :finger: to China and went ahead to present a Congressional medal of Honor to Dalai Lama. And look at what our Netas do (actually they are not netas, but impotent bhungis in front of one white lady) do ? Our FP since Nehru days has been like this. Submissive and bending over to anybody. MFN status was granted to Pak (WTF moment when I learnt about it), etc. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Revealed: Ministers to avoid Dalai Lama to keep China happy Keep off the felicitation ceremony of the Dalai Lama [Images] in New Delhi says a missive delivered at the homes of Union ministers late on Thursday night. The Dalai Lama is to be felicitated on Saturday by the Gandhi Peace Foundation, the All-Party Indian Parliamentary Forum for Tibet and the Core Group for Tibetan Cause for receiving the US Congressional gold medal, the highest civilian award in the United States. The top secret letter is being viewed as a clear signal that New Delhi does not want to rub the Chinese on the wrong side, especially at a time when Sino-Indian relations are on a high following Congress party president Sonia Gandhi's [Images] recent visit to Beijing [Images]. The letter, sent by Cabinet Secretary K M Chandrashekhar, made it clear that the felicitation is 'not in conformity with the country's foreign policy' and hence did not warrant the presence of any member of the Cabinet. Former prime minister Inder Kumar Gujral is to felicitate the Dalai Lama while Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit is listed among the speakers. Dikshit too is unlikely to attend

[Lurker]

Jai ho Sonia Maata ki. Jai so Laal brigade Communist party ki. :dancing2:

[Ram]

It is such acts of symbolism that many times blow-up into full fledged foreign policy crisis. The Japanese PMs insist on visiting the war memorial that honors the japanese soldiers in the China's occupation by Japan. China considers that a honoring war criminals and insist that the Japanese premier should abandon that practice and things have really come to a head over this issue between these two nations. Pragmatism is the key word in foreign policy, not misplaced senses of pride. We need China's help now , for a variety of issues. The last thing we should do right now is to send all sorts of wrong signals to them.

[Lurker]

We need China's help now ' date=' for a variety of issues. The last thing we should do right now is to send all sorts of wrong signals to them.[/quote'] We need China's help as much as it needs India's Sriram. If India becomes anti-China it would be a big problem for China, and they realize it very well. That aside India's relationship with Dalai Lama can be traced right back to Pt. Nehru when a young Dalai Lama escaped to India. We have been supporting the cause of Tibetans since then and Dalai Lama visits India quite frequently. There is nothing new here that would have otherwise antagonized China. xxx

[Bongosamaj]

We need China's help as much as it needs India's Sriram. If India becomes anti-China it would be a big problem for China, and they realize it very well.

Spot on. Yes, China is much more powerful in every sense than India right now- economy, military & resources. But India's ace in the hole is its FREE WORKING MULTICULTURAL REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY. That card beats all the cards China has in the long run. And instead of being in the 'appeasement mode', India should send clear message to China that India is not gonna be her b!tch. A lot of Chinese people are still practicing Buddhists & Daoists, the nations that lie between Sinosphere & indosphere are all buddhist/hindu in its core. As such, in an ideological battle, these nations are FAR MORE LIKELY to pitch in with India than with China, but the only way for that to happen is India to stop being a pu$$y.

[Ram]

We need China's help as much as it needs India's Sriram. If India becomes anti-China it would be a big problem for China, and they realize it very well. That aside India's relationship with Dalai Lama can be traced right back to Pt. Nehru when a young Dalai Lama escaped to India. We have been supporting the cause of Tibetans since then and Dalai Lama visits India quite frequently. There is nothing new here that would have otherwise antagonized China. xxx

I am not saying we need to stop supporting the Tibetan cause Lurks. All i am saying is , we must refrain from such acts of symbolism , that create unwanted media attention and have the potential to blow-up into an unwanted crisis. And i do mildly disagree with what you say when you said " China needs India's help as well". China is very clever in playing the pakistan card against us. They hold more trumps against us , then they we do against them as far as foreign policy is concerned.

[Lurker]

I am not saying we need to stop supporting the Tibetan cause Lurks. All i am saying is ' date=' we must refrain from such acts of symbolism , that create unwanted media attention and have the potential to blow-up into an unwanted crisis.[/quote'] Dalai Lama is widely respected in the Buddhist community of India. He commands a good following of Tibetans in Dharamshaala which used to be a capital of sorts of an exiled leader. In India Dalai Lama has as much respect as any other religious leader - say a Hindu or a Muslim theological leader. He routinely visits Gaya, specially on occassion of Buddh Purnima(birth of Buddha) where he leads the ceremony. Point being Dalai Lama has its own set of followers, and standing in India. There is nothing new here, in fact denying him the usual respect is simply bending over backwards to accomodate China. xxx

[Ram]

Dalai Lama is widely respected in the Buddhist community of India. He commands a good following of Tibetans in Dharamshaala which used to be a capital of sorts of an exiled leader. In India Dalai Lama has as much respect as any other religious leader - say a Hindu or a Muslim theological leader. He routinely visits Gaya, specially on occassion of Buddh Purnima(birth of Buddha) where he leads the ceremony. Point being Dalai Lama has its own set of followers, and standing in India. There is nothing new here, in fact denying him the usual respect is simply bending over backwards to accomodate China. xxx

I do agree with you wholeheartedly when you say The Lama is a revered figure. I say lets support him , in a discreet way. Why make things conspicuous and leave room for controversy ? A couple of Ministers not attending the ceremony wont hurt the Tibetan cause that much. But a couple ministers in attendance could potentially mean an unwanted flare-up with the Chinese Embassy. The Indian Ambassador in Beijing will be summoned and explanations asked. There will be verbal volleys between the spokesperson of the external affairs of the two countries. Is this all required ?

[Bongosamaj]

Mars bar does make some good points on this, Lurks.

[Lurker]

I do agree with you wholeheartedly when you say The Lama is a revered figure. I say lets support him , in a discreet way. Why make things conspicuous and leave room for controversy ? A couple of Ministers not attending the ceremony wont hurt the Tibetan cause that much. But a couple ministers in attendance could potentially mean an unwanted flare-up with the Chinese Embassy. The Indian Ambassador in Beijing will be summoned and explanations asked. There will be verbal volleys between the spokesperson of the external affairs of the two countries. Is this all required ?

Yes it is required. Rather simply, the reverence of Dalai Lama in India has been going on for 4 decades, Chinese know all about it. If they do not change their position on him, why should we? More so since for China Dalai Lama is a political person, for us(and many Indians) he is a widely respected theological figure. xx

[Ram]

Yes it is required. Rather simply, the reverence of Dalai Lama in India has been going on for 4 decades, Chinese know all about it. If they do not change their position on him, why should we? More so since for China Dalai Lama is a political person, for us(and many Indians) he is a widely respected theological figure. xx

Lurks , dont you realize that i am actually in support of your stand , vis-a-vis India's stand on The Lama and the Tibetan, but just want to avoid unwanted foreign policy flare-up ? China knows we support the Tibetan crisis. We provide sanctuary to him and respect him. That is all that ultimately matters. Not who attends what function.

[Lurker]

Lurks ' date=' dont you realize that i am actually in support of your stand , vis-a-vis India's stand on The Lama and the Tibetan, but just want to avoid unwanted foreign policy flare-up ? China knows we support the Tibetan crisis. We provide sanctuary to him and respect him. That is all that ultimately matters. Not who attends what function.[/quote'] I realize that you want to support the Tibetan cause but without ruffling Chinese feathers. My argument is why is there such a need anyway? What has China offered that we are accomodating them? Have they suggested, for example, that Tibet would be given more autonomy? NO. Have they suggested that Dalai Lama would be given lot more freedom? NO. If anything they have become even more despotic and try to shoot down Dalai Lama's cause when they can. Take for example the Dalai Lama's recent felicitation in USA. The Chinese pulled no strings to stop it, more so since their Politburo was meeting around the same time and felt as if it was a slap on their face. Nevermind the fact that while Politburo scheduled the meeting only a month before the Americans had scheduled their meeting a year or so earlier!! So what are Chinese offering us that we are changing our stance? xxx

[Ram]

I realize that you want to support the Tibetan cause but without ruffling Chinese feathers. My argument is why is there such a need anyway? What has China offered that we are accomodating them? Have they suggested, for example, that Tibet would be given more autonomy? NO. Have they suggested that Dalai Lama would be given lot more freedom? NO. If anything they have become even more despotic and try to shoot down Dalai Lama's cause when they can.

But why would the Chinese offer US these things ? The Tibetan crisis is between the Chinese and the Tibetans and we , as an outside power cant overplay our hand. It is the Tibetans who have to bargain for themselves , we can just be facilitators/mediators and not an actual bargaining party. Lets do what we can do to sustain the movement, but lets not over-play our hand either.

Take for example the Dalai Lama's recent felicitation in USA. The Chinese pulled no strings to stop it, more so since their Politburo was meeting around the same time and felt as if it was a slap on their face. Nevermind the fact that while Politburo scheduled the meeting only a month before the Americans had scheduled their meeting a year or so earlier!! So what are Chinese offering us that we are changing our stance?

Dont compare the Americans and Us Lurks. The Americans call the shots with respect to world order , we dont. They can do what they want and yet get away with it because they know ultimately , China would have come back to them for so many things. India , for now , should be pragmatic with its foreign policy , take as many along with it and try to play its cards smart. The last thing you would want to happen now is a for a controversy to erupt over the Tibetan issue. And Lurks , this thing just crossed my mind. I remember reading somewhere that India essentially traded Sikkim+ Arunachal Pradesh for Tibet with China. Do you know that China only very recently accepted Sikkim to be an integral part of India and according to Chinese maps , Arunachal Pradesh is still listed as disputed territory ? I think we just did an exchange offer with the Chinese , i think in 2003 it was.

[Lurker]

But why would the Chinese offer US these things ? The Tibetan crisis is between the Chinese and the Tibetans and we ' date=' as an outside power cant overplay our hand. It is the Tibetans who have to bargain for themselves , we can just be facilitators/mediators and not an actual bargaining party. [b']Lets do what we can do to sustain the movement, but lets not over-play our hand either.

And what is overplay? To felicitate a man who is widely revered in India?? In the very land where the religion he follows was born? Are we meddling inside Chinese affairs? NO. Are we giving Tibetans guns and weapons? NO. Are we supporting anti-Chinese forces in China? NO. So how exactly are we overplaying our cards Sriram?

Dont compare the Americans and Us Lurks. The Americans call the shots with respect to world order , we dont. They can do what they want and yet get away with it because they know ultimately , China would have come back to them for so many things.

And where did I compare USA and India? I gave you a clear cut example of how Chinese dont give a damn to other countries schedule etc. My example was to show that USA has planned this a year ago and still Chinese had issues. And yes I would say Indian concern over Dalai Lama is significantly more than American. American angle is more political. They dont share border with CHina, we do. They dont have Tibetan refugees in India, we do. They do not have Buddhist history, we do. So whose interest are more at stake here - Indian or Americans? xxx

[Ram]

And what is overplay? To felicitate a man who is widely revered in India?? In the very land where the religion he follows was born? Are we meddling inside Chinese affairs? NO. Are we giving Tibetans guns and weapons? NO. Are we supporting anti-Chinese forces in China? NO. So how exactly are we overplaying our cards Sriram?

Do we have to keep re-iterating our stand on the Lama and make things so blatantly conspicuous ? The Lama is the leader of a breakaway secessionist movement and we give him refuge. That is signal enough of our respect towards him and his followers. Dont have to keep stamping it every now and then.

And where did I compare USA and India? I gave you a clear cut example of how Chinese dont give a damn to other countries schedule etc. My example was to show that USA has planned this a year ago and still Chinese had issues.

Okie , i slightly mis-interpreted that as " The US arranging that function knowing the Politburo will be there" Ofcourse the Chinese will have problems. What do you expect ? For them to also take part in that function ?

And yes I would say Indian concern over Dalai Lama is significantly more than American. American angle is more political. They dont share border with CHina, we do. They dont have Tibetan refugees in India, we do. They do not have Buddhist history, we do. So whose interest are more at stake here - Indian or Americans?

And I respect that. All i am asking for is - Lets not play this out publicly. Covert support which is effective is what matters. These things generally blow up into more problems than they are worth.

[Bongosamaj]

I think Mars-bar here has a good point. What really matters is whether or not we support the Tibetan cause or not. Ultimately, what matters is the support, not the show. If we kept quiet about The Dalai Llama but continued to support the Tibetan cause, its far better than the other way round- where we shower felicitations, sabre rattle and then do nothing ala America on this issue. But Lurker's side of the story is pretty compelling too. Tibet is just itching to break away from China and all it'd take is Beijing becomming weak(it will happen- always happens, just a matter of time) and Tibetans would break away. And with China's dominance coupled with its communist totalitarian agenda, all the 'smaller nations' bordering China are nervous. Hell, we Indians are wary of China and keep a tab on China's activities and we are one of the top 5 military powers in the world and top 5 economy as well(in gross terms). Just imagine how much more nervous the smaller nations are ! I've already heard Nepalis and Bhutanis discussing the idea (in their community) about future joining India as a state. The more time passes, the more it becomes obvious that India's idea is a very high ideal & worth following- unity in diversity coupled with representative democracy. It also becomes more obvious with time that you are fooked if you are a tiny nation that has a border with China. And the entire 'North' region is a very finely linked chain of cultures. That Sikkim joined India & are rather happy to be Indians has for all intents & purposes, permanently pushed Bhutan into our camp- the Bhutanese & Sikkimese have a long history of cultural & social intercourse & the Bhutanese are rather happy with how stuff has turned out for Sikkim. They are also slowly comming to the realization that without India, they are toast to the Chinese 'conquer em all' machine. This is the same reason i am very favourable to the idea of creating the Gorkhaland state out of northern west-bengal. A working state for the Nepalis inside of India would go a very long way to push Nepal our way. And there is a very intimate link between Bhutan & tibetan people- there STILL are many who cross the passes back and forth as shepherds and Bhutan comming into Indian camp makes Tibet falling India's way(when China weakens) a near-certainty. And for this, India HAS to show both actual support & media support for the Dalai Llama and not project the idea that India is 'too selfish and only looks out for itself' or 'it is scared of China'. For he is the KEY to this fragile chain of domino-effect.

[Lurker]

Do we have to keep re-iterating our stand on the Lama and make things so blatantly conspicuous ? The Lama is the leader of a breakaway secessionist movement and we give him refuge. That is signal enough of our respect towards him and his followers. Dont have to keep stamping it every now and then.

I can only allude that to you not having spent enough time with Tibet/Tibetans or the changing face of modern India. For the simple reason that Tibet is occupied by China, and indeed that has been the Indian policy for last 40 years. And NOT as you are alluding here - Tibet is trying to break away from China.

Okie , i slightly mis-interpreted that as " The US arranging that function knowing the Politburo will be there" Ofcourse the Chinese will have problems. What do you expect ? For them to also take part in that function ?

What I expect Chinese to do is to be honest in their complaints. In the whole Chinese-US saga this is what happened: 1) USA arranged the felicitation in say August 2006 2) Chinese politburo arranged its meeting in August 2007 3) Dalai Lama was felicitated in September 2007 and yet it is the Chinese Politburo who has the galls to suggest that Americans were trying to embarass them? If Chinese are dishonest in their complaints why should India even begin to think about their angst?

And I respect that. All i am asking for is - Lets not play this out publicly. Covert support which is effective is what matters. These things generally blow up into more problems than they are worth.

So let me get something straight. What you are suggesting is basically this - Meet Dalai Lama and support his cause under the table but do not have the moral courage to stand up in public and say so. Is that how it is Sriram? xxx

[Ram]

I can only allude that to you not having spent enough time with Tibet/Tibetans or the changing face of modern India. For the simple reason that Tibet is occupied by China' date=' and indeed that has been the Indian policy for last 40 years. And NOT as you are alluding here - Tibet is trying to break away from China.[/quote'] Yes sorry , sometimes my words fail me. Tibet is indeed occupied by the Chinese , and that is the reality. They are trying to come out of the Chinese clutches and they have our support, which i support

What I expect Chinese to do is to be honest in their complaints. In the whole Chinese-US saga this is what happened: 1) USA arranged the felicitation in say August 2006 2) Chinese politburo arranged its meeting in August 2007 3) Dalai Lama was felicitated in September 2007 and yet it is the Chinese Politburo who has the galls to suggest that Americans were trying to embarass them? If Chinese are dishonest in their complaints why should India even begin to think about their angst?

But that isnt the case at all now. Govt minister seen publicly along side a "Freedome movement leader" is not the thing to do when you want to maintain calm. Again i say lurks , this isnt about our policy vis-a-vis Tibet. This is about keeping peace.

So let me get something straight. What you are suggesting is basically this - Meet Dalai Lama and support his cause under the table but do not have the moral courage to stand up in public and say so. Is that how it is Sriram? xxx

I say - do the thing that is beneficial to both India and Tibet. You sat - Do the right thing , even though it may cause some problems . Whose approach do you think is right ?

[Ram]

And reg posts about Nepal and Bhutan acceding to India, i immediately see some problems. --- Nepal is in the grip of the Maoists who want to eliminate monarchy. India has for long been the supporter of the king. How can India just drop its tradational position and negiotiate with the Maoists who are, according to many , a terror group ?

[Bongosamaj]

--- Nepal is in the grip of the Maoists who want to eliminate monarchy. India has for long been the supporter of the king. How can India just drop its tradational position and negiotiate with the Maoists who are, according to many , a terror group ?

You completely misunderstood my point. I wasn't speaking of 'lets do it now/negotiate with maoists etc etc'. All India CAN/SHOULD do is keep its unity in diversity perspective & clean up its political process. As long as those two happen & india's economic boom keeps up, we don't have to do anything, eventually these countries will come to us and want to join up, like Sikkim did. And this is not in the short-term future perspective but perhaps in the next 50-100 years. By then, Maoists will most likely be history- maoists arnt exactly very 'popular' in Nepal ( i know a LOT of nepalis and have lived in areas with significant nepali population in the last 10-15 yrs). Its just that their Monarchy is even less popular and most people would rather support the Maoists than the monarchy. But from nepali societerial perspective, Maoist support is a tool to get rid of the monarchy & lessen corruption in the government. The vast majority of them arnt dyed-in-wool commies. So nepal really, looks 'a lot worse than it is'.