FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
Posted on 06/06/2002 10:16:39 AM PDT by ex-Texan
The India-Pakistan Crisis and Chinese Strategy
by J. R. Nyquist
Everyone is talking about the worsening relations between India and Pakistan, the two emerging nuclear powers of Asia. What is hardly mentioned is the role of China as Pakistan's supporter and India's enemy.
Americans may not appreciate the extent to which China and India are hostile to one another. After consolidating its conquest of Tibet in the 1950s, China did not accept the pre-existing Tibetan-Indian border. China and India began to fight in October-November 1962 when Indian patrols discovered a Chinese military road running through disputed territory. Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru ordered Indian troops to free Indian territory of "Chinese intruders." Nehru's troops, however, were not up to the task. The People's Liberation Army defeated them. Afterwards, China joined up with India's archenemy, Pakistan.
Read Internal Links in Article
But here is the interesting part: In 1962 Moscow did not support the communist side in the conflict between India and China. The Kremlin pretended to be sympathetic to India. This effectively drew India into a military partnership with Soviet Russia. In the meantime, while the conflict between India and China remained unresolved, Russia moved into a military-technical partnership with China during the 1990s. Russia is now supporting both sides in South Asia: specifically, Russia is giving massive military-technical assistance to China (which supports Pakistan); and Russia continues to enjoy a longstanding military-technical collaboration with India. (Asian politics doesn't get more interesting than this.)
In 1984 a KGB defector named Anatoliy Golitsyn offered an explanation for Russia's Asian moves. In a book titled "New Lies for Old: The Communist Strategy for Deception and Disinformation" Golitsyn stated that the Sino-Soviet dispute (beginning in the early 1960s) was a strategic maneuver to win American economic and technical support for China. Golitsyn added that this maneuver simultaneously gave Russia and China greater leverage over the politics of the Indian subcontinent. Golitsyn stated, "Where a serious dispute exists between two Third World countries, a pattern in Soviet and Chinese policies can be discerned in which the Soviet Union and China take up opposite sides and adopt a clearcut duality in their policies." Golitsyn suggested that China's 1962 attack on India was an intentional provocation for pushing India into Russia's arms. At the same time China could make important inroads into India's rival, Pakistan.
As the chief military suppliers of India and Pakistan, Russia and China would - through support for each side - gradually obtain an indirect veto power over Indian and Pakistani foreign and military policies. China's decision to give nuclear and missile technology to terrorist Pakistan was therefore based on profound calculations. Far from fearing radical Islam, communist China has boldly sought to ingratiate itself with Muslim extremists. On the other side, Russia entered Afghanistan in a way that directly supported India by threatening Pakistan.
Consider the logic of the situation: Pakistan would not dare provoke India without the support of China. India would not dare invade Pakistan without support from Russia. Therefore, India and Pakistan depend on Russia and China. According to Golitsyn this dependency will one day be used to effect "an eventual communist takeover."
"After successful use of [this strategy] in the early stages of the final phase of policy … a Sino-Soviet reconciliation could be expected," wrote Golitsyn in 1984. "It is contemplated and implied by the long-range policy and by the strategic disinformation on the [Sino-Soviet] split."
I believe that Golitsyn was onto something because his predictions have been correct again and again. China's military modernization is well under way and we already see that the rift between Moscow and Beijing has been healed. "Before long," wrote Golitsyn in 1984, "the communist strategists might be persuaded that the balance had swung irreversibly in their favor. In that event they might well decide on a Sino-Soviet 'reconciliation.'"
Readers are reminded of last year's Russia-China Friendship Treaty, [Also see] in which Russia indirectly promised to support China in a future conflict over Taiwan. Twenty years ago such an agreement would have alarmed the West. But today there is no alarm. "The political, economic, military, diplomatic, and ideological cooperation between all the communist states, at present partially concealed, would become clearly visible," predicted Golitsyn in 1984. "There might even be public acknowledgement that the splits and disputes were long-term disinformation operations that had successfully deceived the 'imperialist' powers. The effect on Western morale can be imagined." As the future military balance shifts in favor of a new trans-Asian alliance, the collapse of the Soviet empire would be reversed. According to Golitsyn, "The process would be painful. Concessions made in the name of economic and political reform would be withdrawn. Religious and intellectual dissent would be suppressed. Nationalism and all other forms of genuine opposition would be crushed."
Already, these trends can be observed in Russia.
Even more ominous, consider recent stories involving the Chinese. An Associated Press report describes the landing of ten Chinese men of military age on the Southern Californian coast. At approximately 3:30 a.m. on May 23 an off-duty lifeguard spotted ten Chinese coming ashore at Newport Beach, California. They swam naked from ships out at sea, using life vests -- their clothing sealed in plastic bags. (Some of the clothing included full suits.) (see http://www.sacbee.com/state_wire/story/2854164p-3649714c.html )
Two weeks ago the CIA and the Department of Defense publicly warned of future Chinese cyber-attacks against the United States. The Institute for Strategic Studies put forward a classified report warning the Pentagon, U.S. law enforcement and other agencies of the emerging Chinese cyber-threat. Last year Chinese hackers knocked out the White House's Web site and invaded over 660 other U.S. sites. The CIA's information operations manager, John Serabian, has testified that the U.S. is vulnerable to economic disruption by Chinese military hackers. (see http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/05/28/1022243318686.html )
It should also be noted that the communist spy base at Lourdes (Cuba) recently passed from Russian control to Chinese control. The Lourdes spy base is said to be a potent cyber-warfare facility. The FCC alleges that Lourdes is capable of Interfering with U.S. military and civilian communications. There has already been at least one instance of Chinese technicians sending a false message to New York air traffic controllers involving U.S. military flight codes.
Last week The Washington Times reported that China has been preparing a six-month dress rehearsal for an invasion of Taiwan. According to the Times, the official Chinese press has been ominously silent about these military preparations. According to the Times, "[U.S.] Intelligence officials are concerned that if war breaks out between India and Pakistan … the Chinese military might use the war games to attack Taiwan."
China's war preparations gain added significance when we look at China's past support for America's enemies in the "War on Terror." In a June 1 story, Bill Gertz of The Washington Times wrote of 30 Chinese-made anti-aircraft missiles captured by U.S. troops in Afghanistan. It is also significant that Taliban and al Qaeda leaders are believed to be hiding in the territory of China's ally, Pakistan. As of last week Chinese equipment and personnel were deploying to Pakistan's new strategic deepwater port at Gwadar. China intends to use Gwadar for basing submarines and other warships. These could operate directly against the West's oil shipping routes out of the nearby Persian Gulf . Clearly, the Chinese are positioning themselves near all the world's key strategic waterways, including the Panama Canal.
China's moves are not those of a friendly, peaceable country. As tensions grow in Korea, South Asia and the Middle East, China's position is strengthened. The same could be said for Russia. Since America's chief export is stability it necessarily follows that America's enemies will export instability (i.e., in the form of nuclear missile weapons). After this fashion the "zone of militarism" disrupts civilization and overturns it in the name of revolution.
As Lenin once wrote, "The admission that the government cannot now be terrified and consequently disrupted by terror is tantamount to a complete condemnation of terror as a system of struggle, as a sphere of activity sanctioned by the [party] program." ("What is to be done?" Section F)
© 2002 Jeffrey R. Nyquist
| The India-Pakistani Conflict... some background information- | ||||||
|
FYI, I just posted a more modern map of short-term fallout effects ( over the continent ) there. |
||||||
When I say W, I'm refering to the rest of the clan, too - like Dr. Rice, Rumsfeldt, et al, (but, obviously, NOT Mineta).
This article bears notice. The Kings of the East prepare for the march.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.