Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Generational Dynamics World View
*** 29-Aug-17 World View -- China and India pull back from Doklam, while North Korea sharply escalates missile crisis

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
  • China and India announce pullback agreement on Doklam Plateau
  • Many unanswered questions about the China-India Doklam agreement
  • North Korea launches ballistic missile into Japan's airspace

****
**** China and India announce pullback agreement on Doklam Plateau
****


[Image: g170828b.jpg]
Chinese army soldiers in military training (Reuters, 2013)

China and India made surprising announcements on Monday that
they had agreed to pull back troops to reduce tension on
Bhutan's Doklam Plateau.

For almost three months, China and India have each had 300 soldiers
just 100 meters apart on the plateau, 3,000 meters above sea level.
India did not increase its troop strength on the plateau itself, but
brought troops into bases nearby, and raising the alert level in
preparation for war.

The border dispute involving China, India and Bhutan over the Doklam
Plateau continued to escalate for a long time, as we reported.
China attempted to annex
the region, which belongs to Bhutan, and on June 16 sent Chinese
troops and construction workers to begin road construction. Bhutan
troops tried to prevent the Chinese troop incursion, but they were
overrun. India sent in its own troops, saying that it did so when
Bhutan invoked a treaty with India and asked for help, resulting in a
standoff.

China made increasingly vitriolic threats towards India, saying that
there couldn't be negotiations until India unilaterally withdrew its
troops, and that China's army would destroy India's army if India
didn't withdraw.

So now it turns out that there have been secret negotiations going
on for weeks, despite the vitriolic threats.

China's foreign ministry spokesman Hua Chunying announced China's
position at a press briefing:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"Q: We have learned that on the afternoon of August
> 28, the Indian border troops and equipment that illegal crossed
> the Sikkim sector of the China-India border have all been
> withdrawn to the Indian side, marking an end to the trespassing
> incident. Do you have more information?
>
> A: On June 18, the Indian border troops illegally crossed the
> well-delimited China-India border in the Sikkim Sector into
> China's Dong Lang area. China has lodged representations with the
> Indian side many times through diplomatic channels, made the facts
> and truth of this situation known to the international community,
> clarified China's solemn position and explicit demands, and urged
> India to immediately pull back its border troops to the India's
> side. In the meantime, the Chinese military has taken effective
> countermeasures to ensure the territorial sovereignty and
> legitimate rights and interests of the state.
>
> At about 2:30 p.m. of August 28, the Indian side withdrew all its
> border personnel and equipment that were illegally on the Chinese
> territory to the Indian side. The Chinese personnel onsite have
> verified this situation. China will continue fulfilling its
> sovereign rights to safeguard territorial sovereignty in
> compliance with the stipulations of the border-related historical
> treaty."<END QUOTE>
[/indent]

Hua received additional questions, pressing her to explain whether
China had also pulled back. She apparently became increasingly
annoyed and the questions, and finally answered:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"A: The Indian side has withdrawn all its trespassing
> border personnel and equipment to the Indian side. The Chinese
> personnel onsite have verified this situation. China will continue
> fulfilling its sovereign rights to safeguard territorial
> sovereignty in compliance with the stipulations of the
> border-related historical treaty. In light of the changes on the
> ground, China will accordingly make necessary adjustments and
> deployment."<END QUOTE>
[/indent]

India's Ministry of External Affairs also issued a statement:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"In recent weeks, India and China have maintained
> diplomatic communication in respect of the incident at
> Doklam. During these communications, we were able to express our
> views and convey our concerns and interests.
>
> On this basis, expeditious disengagement of border personnel at
> the face-off site at Doklam has been agreed to and is
> on-going."<END QUOTE>
[/indent]

China's Foreign Ministry and India's Ministry of External Affairs

Related: China and India prepare for border war at Doklam Plateau (12-Aug-2017)

****
**** Many unanswered questions about the China-India Doklam agreement
****


The two announcements leave many questions unanswered, including the
following:
  • What did China concede? India's statement was about
    "disengagement," and India has pulled back its troops, but China
    apparently has not. In fact, China continues to claim that the region
    that it's illegally trying to annex is its "sovereign territory."

  • Is China ending its road-building work? Is its earth-moving
    equipment being withdrawn? Unnamed Indian officials have reportedly
    said they have, but all that China's spokesman said was "In light of
    the changes on the ground, China will accordingly make necessary
    adjustments and deployment."

  • Even if China has ended its road-building work, will they simply
    start again next week or next month?

Once again, we have to point out that China is a highly militarized
country, with a huge army and bristling with missiles, and it's lied
repeatedly and continuously about its claims and criminal activities
in the South China Sea, and so there is no reason to believe any
claims they make about Bhutan's territory on the Doklam Plateau.

My personal belief, based on all the reports that I've read, is that
China was completely surprised by what happened. I believe that China
expected to overwhelm Bhutan's army and annex the Doklam Plateau
quickly and easily. Instead, I believe that the Chinese were
completely surprised by India's intervention, making a quick and easy
victory impossible. New Delhi TV and India Today

****
**** North Korea launches ballistic missile into Japan's airspace
****


[Image: g170828c.jpg]
Map showing trajectory of North Korean missile (Yonhap)

North Korea on Tuesday fired a long-range ballistic missile that flew
over Japan, traveling more than 2,700 km with a maximum altitude of
around 550 km. Technically, that's an act of war, but Japan didn't
try to shoot it down, nor did the United States.

Japan's prime minister Shinzo Abe said:

> [indent]<QUOTE>"The North Korean missile that was launched passed
> over our nation and landed in the Pacific Ocean. The government
> had been monitoring the launch from the moment it was fired.
>
> We have done our utmost to ensure the safety of the people. The
> missile that passed over our nation represents the greatest and
> gravest threat to our nation ever. It is also a threat to the
> peace and stability of the Asia-Pacific region.
>
> This reckless act of launching a missile that flies over our
> country is an unprecedented, serious and important
> threat."<END QUOTE>
[/indent]

North Korea has been trying to develop a ballistic missile with a
nuclear payload since the 1990s, and international attempts have been
made to dissuade further development. However, diplomacy hasn't
worked, sanctions haven't worked, threats of retaliation haven't work,
and Security Council resolutions haven't worked. Government leaders
in many countries -- the US, Russia, China, South Korea, and so forth
-- have made delusional statements about negotiations with North
Korea, but they've repeatedly failed.

So one choice now is to accept North Korea as a full-fledged nuclear,
using nuclear weapons for all sorts of international blackmail. The
other choice now is a military option of some kind. One way or the
other, the question should be answered within a few months. Korea Times and Australian Financial Review and Reuters and South China Morning Post (Hong Kong)

Related: Japan will shoot down N. Korean missiles via 'collective self-defense' (13-Aug-2017)



KEYS: Generational Dynamics, China, India, Bhutan, Doklam Plateau,
Hua Chunying, North Korea, Japan, Shinzo Abe

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by radind - 05-14-2016, 03:21 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by radind - 05-23-2016, 10:31 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by radind - 08-11-2016, 08:59 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by SomeGuy - 01-18-2017, 09:23 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by tg63 - 02-04-2017, 10:08 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 03-13-2017, 03:33 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by SomeGuy - 03-15-2017, 02:56 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by SomeGuy - 03-15-2017, 03:13 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 05-30-2017, 01:04 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 07-08-2017, 01:34 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by tg63 - 08-09-2017, 11:07 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by tg63 - 08-10-2017, 02:38 PM
29-Aug-17 World View -- China and India pull back from Doklam, while North Korea shar - by John J. Xenakis - 08-28-2017, 10:02 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 10-25-2017, 03:07 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by rds - 10-31-2017, 03:35 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by rds - 10-31-2017, 06:33 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by noway2 - 11-20-2017, 04:31 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 12-28-2017, 11:00 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 12-31-2017, 11:14 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 06-22-2018, 02:54 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 07-11-2018, 01:42 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 07-11-2018, 01:54 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 07-19-2018, 12:43 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 07-25-2018, 02:18 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 07-11-2018, 01:58 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 08-18-2018, 03:42 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 08-19-2018, 04:39 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by tg63 - 09-25-2019, 11:12 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 03-09-2020, 02:11 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Camz - 03-10-2020, 10:10 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by tg63 - 03-12-2020, 11:11 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 03-16-2020, 03:21 PM
RE: 58 year rule - by Tim Randal Walker - 04-01-2020, 11:17 AM
RE: 58 year rule - by John J. Xenakis - 04-02-2020, 12:25 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Isoko - 05-04-2020, 02:51 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by tg63 - 01-04-2021, 12:13 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by CH86 - 01-05-2021, 11:17 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by mamabug - 01-10-2021, 06:16 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by mamabug - 01-11-2021, 09:06 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by mamabug - 01-12-2021, 02:53 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by mamabug - 01-13-2021, 03:58 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by mamabug - 01-13-2021, 04:16 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by mamabug - 01-15-2021, 03:36 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by galaxy - 08-19-2021, 03:03 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by galaxy - 08-21-2021, 01:41 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by galaxy - 02-27-2022, 06:06 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by galaxy - 02-27-2022, 10:42 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by galaxy - 02-28-2022, 12:26 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by galaxy - 02-28-2022, 04:08 PM

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Why the social dynamics viewpoint to the Strauss-Howe generational theory is wrong Ldr 5 4,830 06-05-2020, 10:55 PM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  Theory: cyclical generational hormone levels behind the four turnings and archetypes Ldr 2 3,410 03-16-2020, 06:17 AM
Last Post: Ldr
  The Fall of Cities of the Ancient World (42 Years) The Sacred Name of God 42 Letters Mark40 5 4,695 01-08-2020, 08:37 PM
Last Post: Eric the Green
  Generational cycle research Mikebert 15 16,290 02-08-2018, 10:06 AM
Last Post: pbrower2a
Video Styxhexenhammer666 and his view of historical cycles. Kinser79 0 3,342 08-27-2017, 06:31 PM
Last Post: Kinser79

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 10 Guest(s)