News India-China War in 2012? Analysts Predict

[hammertime]

Apparently some Indian defense analyst predicts that a 'nervous' China will attack India in 2012. What do guys think?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124748777728332473.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

 

[rootX]

What do guys think?

Nonsense.

 

[mgb_phys]

Where would you stage it? Belgium is far too small for a fixture of that size, I suppose you could rent Siberia.

 

[Tibarn]

I doubt it. But if they did, we'd be looking at World War III.

 

[Pengwuino]

I doubt it. But if they did, we'd be looking at World War III.

And why would that be? World War 3?

 

[waht]

War with Pakistan is more likely.

 

[Evo]

This guy pulls this out of the air without any military intelligence as a basis. Ridiculous.

 

[Tibarn]

And why would that be? World War 3?

The world is far too interdependent for a massive regional conflict not to have global repercussions. The first step would obviously be to try and broker a peace settlement, but if that fails the rest of Southeast Asia as well as Pakistan would quickly join the fray. Countries like Japan or the United States that have vested interests in the area or are intimidated by a more powerful China would naturally keep a close eye on things and be ready to intervene. Naturally, the alliance system would come into play.

If things got big enough, there's always the chance Russia might join in the hope of expanding into resource-rich central Asia. Depending on how long the conflict lasts, I can definitely see it expanding. Granted, the actual fighting would probably mostly take place in Southeast Asia and maybe spread a bit from there, but I can definitely see far-off countries getting involved.

 

[Pengwuino]

The world is far too interdependent for a massive regional conflict not to have global repercussions. The first step would obviously be to try and broker a peace settlement, but if that fails the rest of Southeast Asia as well as Pakistan would quickly join the fray. Countries like Japan or the United States that have vested interests in the area or are intimidated by a more powerful China would naturally keep a close eye on things and be ready to intervene. Naturally, the alliance system would come into play.

If things got big enough, there's always the chance Russia might join in the hope of expanding into resource-rich central Asia. Depending on how long the conflict lasts, I can definitely see it expanding. Granted, the actual fighting would probably mostly take place in Southeast Asia and maybe spread a bit from there, but I can definitely see far-off countries getting involved.

I think we learned our lessons about actually fighting with our allies because they went to war back in WW1.

 

[Civilized]

In my opinion the prediction is absurd. I believe it to be unlikely for China to be an aggressor in any war anytime soon.

The cultural revolution was so painful for China, they lost even more of their culture than did Europe in WW2, and it happened more recently. Since that time, there has been a "vacuum of belief" as a chinese colleague of mine put it, "the only thing [chinese] people believe in now is money", he said.

How could a country that has been through so much strife so recently become an aggresor in a major war, I just don't see it happening.

 

[Tibarn]

I think we learned our lessons about actually fighting with our allies because they went to war back in WW1.

Perhaps. Still, many countries really don't want to see China any more powerful than it absolutely needs to be. Directly to the south, by Malaysia and Indonesia, is a major shipping route carrying oil from the Middle East to Japan and the United States. If China ends up dominating Southeast Asia, it could prove very inconvenient. And guess who's China's biggest rival in that region?

 

[Pengwuino]

Perhaps. Still, many countries really don't want to see China any more powerful than it absolutely needs to be. Directly to the south, by Malaysia and Indonesia, is a major shipping route carrying oil from the Middle East to Japan and the United States. If China ends up dominating Southeast Asia, it could prove very inconvenient. And guess who's China's biggest rival in that region?

Point is, no world war. We're all not going to go nuking and bombing our biggest trade partners. They won't either. There's way too much money involved. You don't become a superpower by alienating the world by bombing countries. They aren't that stupid.

 

[rootX]

@ nervous china:

I know that China is bit unstable but I am not sure if they are nervous (they are not even ready to apologize for past mistakes as they would if they were nervous):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7932091.stm

China faces a number of highly sensitive anniversaries this year, including 20 years since the military crushed pro-democracy protests in Tiananmen Square, and 50 years since an anti-China uprising in Lhasa that sparked the Dalai Lama's flight into exile.

The authorities in Beijing also fear that the economic downturn and job losses for millions of migrant workers could trigger outbreaks of social unrest.

And from current understanding about the past Uighur riots, I believe they handled it quite well:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8140492.stm

 

[nabki]

One thing we should all note is that it is no longer acceptable to launch large-scale campaigns that target civilians as in WW1 and WW2, and that we also have nukes nowadays of course. If there is any chance of a WW3 happening, it probably has happened, either in the cold war, with indirect warfare between 2 factions: commies and cappies, each headed by its own superpower. stuff like Ogden, Korea, Nam, 73, 67, Afghanistan and many others just show us how said war was conducted: relatively by proxy.
The other candidate for WW3 would be the War on Terror, but that hasn't unfolded completely for me to really say much about.

Of course, if a 3rd (or 4th?) world war between China and India does happen, expect a lot of the same. They will not launch direct attacks against each other, but will start a series of proxy wars and attempts at dominating various key markets, and resource centers. Water will not be an issue, since the two countries are so saturated, so border wars and such probably won't happen.
We have to note, of course that stuff like that happening is unlikely, as China's economy focuses on things that India's economy does not, and vice versa. If stuff like this DOES happen, I expect the Chinese to emerge victorious. they have better infrastructure, and a more dynamic economy. India is running on 1950's infra. corruption in India is more of a problem that in China. stuff like that.

 

[Astronuc]

And from current understanding about the past Uighur riots, I believe they handled it quite well:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8140492.stm

I heard or read (I have to find the source) that Chinese police or paramilitary stood by while Han civilians attacked Uighurs in a Uighur neighborhood.

The article talks about 'executions of' those responsible. But does that imply the Chinese government will selectively (partially) execute Uighurs and not Hans.

The Uighurs who are native to Xinjiang are under pressure from the migration of Han Chinese to Xinjiang, and that has led to tensions between the ethnic groups. Apparently one of the initiating events in the Ürümqi riots July riots was an incident involving attacks by two or more Hans and a Uighur youth (source needed).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_2009_Ürümqi_riots

Commentary: China's ethnic policies root cause of Uighur riots
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/opinion/story/71613.html

China's ethnic policies root cause of Uighur riots
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/news/tms/politics/2009/Jul/10/china_s_ethnic_policies_root_cause_of_uighur_riots.html

The China-India conflict is transnational, whereas the Uighur-Han conflict is intranational or internal to China. China has interests in territory which was part of Kashmir, and China and India (and Pakistan to some extent) have conflicting economic interests in south Asia. China has supported Pakistan in recent decades, but with the Uighur problems, it might rethink that support, especially if Uighur separatists are using Pakistan territory for asylum.

 

[rootX]

I heard or read (I have to find the source) that Chinese police or paramilitary stood by while Han civilians attacked Uighurs in a Uighur neighborhood.

The article talks about 'executions of' those responsible. But does that imply the Chinese government will selectively (partially) execute Uighurs and not Hans.

It wouldn't be surprising. When I said handled well I did not intend to mean that in a fair way - the point I tried to make that government is more than enough capable to tackle that scale internal disturbances so they don't need something external to handle these kind of internal crisis.There are similar ethnic tensions in Tibet also I believe.

 

[Astronuc]

It wouldn't be surprising. When I said handled well I did not intend to mean that in a fair way - the point I tried to make that government is more than enough capable to tackle that scale internal disturbances so they don't need something external to handle these kind of internal crisis.

True - for both India and China, but the China-India border dispute has been stronger than any dispute between Pakistan and China. China has assisted Pakistan. Perhaps this is to keep India off-balance, the way Pakistan has used the Taliban and insurgents in Kashmir in order to keep India off-balance.

There are similar ethnic tensions in Tibet also I believe.

Yes - the ethnic tensions are much the same.

 

[aquitaine]

The article talks about 'executions of' those responsible. But does that imply the Chinese government will selectively (partially) execute Uighurs and not Hans.

Probably because the majority of the ones killed were HAn.

The cultural revolution was so painful for China, they lost even more of their culture than did Europe in WW2, and it happened more recently. Since that time, there has been a "vacuum of belief" as a chinese colleague of mine put it, "the only thing [chinese] people believe in now is money", he said.

That same culture was directly responsible for turning China into the sick man of asia, it has been holding the country back for centuries.