Sunday, May 12, 2013

China’s intrusions

By NESTOR MATA
MALAYA
‘The emergent superpower has been intruding not only in territorial waters, islands and shoals of the Philippines and other Southeast Asian nations, but also in India’s side of the Himalayan border.’
JUST like what China has been doing in the territorial waters, islands and shoals of the Philippines and other Southeast Asian neighbors which it claims to be parts of the South China Sea, the emergent superpower has been intruding in India’s side of the Himalayan border for many years now.
China, according to media reports from New Delhi, made around 400 incursions last year and around 100 have already taken place this year, and now it has set up military patrol camps within India’s side of the longest un-demarcated boundary in the Himalayan mountains between the two countries and has refused to vacate them.
While the Indian government has been doing its best to play down the situation, “there was no such pussyfooting from Beijing… and it continued to stick to its stand that there has been no violation and its troops may stay put in the area until the stand-off is resolved through talks,” Harsh V. Pant, a professor of defense studies at King’s College in London, wrote in The Economist.
The incursions, in Pant’s view, signaled that China has no plans to accept the 4,000-kilometer Line of Actual Control or LAC across the disputed Himalayan border between the two nations. “The boundary negotiations are not going anywhere, and this may be a gambit to pressure India to make concessions,” he wrote. “The latest tension comes at a time when the two sides have been trying to bring some semblance to a relationship that has become fragile over the last few years.”
“China’s growing military muscle coupled with creeping nationalism raises hackles in New Delhi…,” Pant went on. “Even if some in India are alarmed, Delhi is not doing anything to address its own defenses. The political leadership is beset with multiple domestic crises. And when it comes to foreign affairs, one of its main topics of debate is resurrecting nonalignment — an idea that should have died with the Indian defeat at the hands of the Chinese in the Despang area of Ladakh in 1962. This strategic dithering may be prompting adventurism by Beijing.”
The Chinese intrusions in India are happening at a time when Beijing’s relations with its neighbors, like Japan. Taiwan, and the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Indonesia, which are members of the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean), are also tense, suggesting it is part of a larger policy of China.
Pant thinks friction with India could have “more far-reaching effects…New Delhi and Beijing both view themselves as rising powers and as a consequence, their interests and capabilities are running up against each other not only in Asia but in various parts of the world as well…The risk is not that there will be a repeat of the Sino-Indian war anytime soon. It’s true that the simmering, unresolved border conflict makes unforeseen clashes possible. However, those who hark back to the days of India’s ignominious defeat in 1962 fail to acknowledge that India’s leaders have a much clearer view of China’s intentions and their capabilities. The most likely outcome is an institutionalization of antagonism that will take a toll on both sides… the level of strategic distrust has become so corrosive that the two states risk becoming open antagonists.”
China’s provocations, Pant concluded, are clearly mounting and India will have to respond with greater degree of resolve if it wants the world to view it as a credible emerging power, too.
One can only wonder whether China’s military muscle is already so strong enough to face conflicts simultaneously with India in its Himalayan border, with Japan over islands in the Sea of Japan, with South Korea in the Korean Peninsula, and with the Philippines, Vietnam, Brunei and Malaysia over territorial waters, isles and shoals in the South China Sea? And with the United States, which has been strengthening its military forces and alliances, specifically its four allies – Japan, South Korea, Vietnam and the Philippines – under the so-called “pivot” to its Asian policy?
***
With the May 13 national elections looming just four days and nights away, President Noynoy Aquino’s dream of a “12-0” sweep by his Liberal Party-led coalition senatorial candidates is turning into a political nightmare, not only for him but also for his frenetic LP confreres, particularly the chief campaigners, Senator Franklin Drilon and Secretary of Interior and Local Governments Mar Roxas, who dreams of becoming the LP’s standard bearer in the 2016 presidential polls.
Even with Aquino himself leading the campaign, an overwhelming majority vote that they expect to secure for their senatorial bets will not be achieved. And in the view of objective political observers, analysts and IT experts, unless safeguards are adopted the poll results could be pre-ordained already through the magic of “Hocus-PICOS” machines of the Commission of Elections.
“By no means is the outcome secure…,” one veteran political watcher said, “They have given up substantial vote-rich areas and blocs that the rival United Nationalist Alliance, led by Vice President Jejomar Binay, has already a lock on,” such as the Ilocos region, Cagayan Valley, Cebu, and in many areas in blackout-plagued Mindanao.” And they also have practically given up on the bloc-voting Iglesia ni Cristo and the Catholic Church.
Another political watcher is even willing to bet that the Binay-led UNA “will pull a surprise on election day, assuming that polls have not been rigged. The sweep that Noynoy Aquino has been bragging about will only take place in his mind!”
Besides, according to a pre-election survey, candidates’ political parties do not matter to a majority of 62% of voters. Only 15% of the voters said “Yes,” while 13% said “Don’t care.” That means that elections are won by men and women chiefly because most people vote against somebody rather than for somebody.
***
Quote of the Day: “An election is a bet on the future, not a popularity contest of the past.” – James Reston
Thought of the Day: “Elections are a good deal like marriages, there’s no accounting for anyone’s taste. Every time you see a bridegroom, you wonder why she picked him, and the same with public officials.” – Will Rogers

No comments: