.png)
.jpg)
Why are we getting so worked up about utterings by Comrade Luo Yuan working ‘under’ the Director General of the world military research department at a People’s Liberation Army academy when there are hundreds of generals senior in rank to him in the PLA. His self appointed title of “reasonable hardliner” indicates a troubled mind as normally it is the reporters that should have given him such label. One wonders how long he has been serving in the ‘world military research department’ as is being reported.
Whether he is new or has been serving long in this appointment, it may be better for the PLA to shift him out from ‘world military research’ and transfer him to the historical department of PLA to brush up his knowledge, provided there is such a historical department that contains undistorted history. Of course such shift may not be necessary if he has inadvertently refereed to ‘Indians’ confusing them with ‘Red Indians’. On the contrary, if his squeak, “The Indian side should not provoke new problems and increase military deployment at the border areas and stir up new trouble” is genuinely meant for India, then such a transfer must be done post haste.
Comrade Luo Yuan and his colleagues need to first understand the meaning of provocation. Having understood the basics, they should then graduate to PLA history. It would be knowledgeable for them to read up about the 1967 incident at Nathu La. That would provide them with wider understanding of what provocation and grave provocation implies and how to differentiate between the two. They would be quite thrilled reading the opening narrative that the PLA strategy of shock action was used by opening heavy fire (both automatics and artillery) on unsuspecting Indians laying barbed wire fence on the open pass devoid of any cover whatsoever, causing some 70 casualties. But then what was the result – 400 PLA casualties by China’s own admission. Now, it is possible that PLA archives may have advertently or inadvertently missed an odd zero, so as not to scare youngsters like Comrade Luo Yuan who then would have been in school. But then there is this wonderful thing called internet that can give you all the details, provided the Ubuntu Kylin (Chinese operating system) doesn’t have backdoors through which PLA Blue Force IW units can feed distorted information, like the Americans have managed in all the current Windows operating systems.
Next graduation level for Luo Yuan would be to read up on the Sumdorong Chu (Sangduoluo He as you call it in China) incident of 1986 in the Wangdung area where a 40 strong PLA intrusion multiplied like rabbits to 200 in no time, replete with fortifications and even a helipad. And this was 24 years after 1962. But when India moved its troops, Deng Xiaoping warned India that China would “teach India a lesson” just like it had done to Vietnam. Now hopefully Comrade Luo Yuan knows who Deng Xiaoping was (God bless his soul) and more importantly what appointment he held in 1986. As to what was the outcome of the standoff was, I leave it to Comrade Luo Yuan to research. After all you cannot get everything on a plate like Tibet.
It is quite possible that the recent standoff this April in Despang Plains of Ladakh may have caused Luo Yuan to get uppity. But then, Comrade Luo Yuan should not try to compete with Comrade Deng Xiaping in issuing warning to India even if his namesake ‘Yuan’ is gaining momentum as international currency. Also, detailed study of past history, as suggested above, could help better sense prevail. What India does in its territory is nobody else’s business including China, Luo Yuan included.
No one is asking Luo Yuan how many divisions have been pumped into Tibet along the Line of Control with India, why are nuclear missiles deployed in Tibet targeting India, why massive exercises are being done in close proximity of the LAC practicing capture of passes using mechanized forces, why China is supplying arms, communication equipment and arms manufacturing capability to insurgents within India, and why PLA is digging 22 tunnels in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir to house missiles. It is up to China to enjoy cooperating with Pakistan in sponsoring terrorism and buffer up proxies for both China and Pakistan in Al Qaeda, Haqqanis, Taliban, Maoists in India and Nepal, and United State Wa Army in Myanmar. After all, the confusing mix of the middle kingdom pride and the deeply embedded guilt of decades of perceived humiliation are not easy to overcome.
But then there is nothing new in the China’s carrot and stick policy and playing the Pakistan card against India. 51 years have gone by since 1962. India’s decency can hardly be taken for granted. The stick may be responded by the bamboo. Before the change of guard in China, most of the analysts had predicted that Xi Jingping will not be able to bring about much change because the CCP is still stuck with its past policies, plus the new vision of a bipolar world but only a China led Asia. It may be worthwhile for Xi Jingping to discount India as a hindrance in these ambitions and examine what a strategic partnership with India could achieve for China instead of pinprick hostilities. Analyses of such a partnership could be highly revealing; politically, economically and strategically.
Courtesy : Indian Defence Review Net Edition (www.indiandefencereview.com)