#India china standoff

[werindialive]

“The prime minister misled the country by saying that no one has entered our territory.” AIMIM chief Owaisi

All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) president Asaduddin Owaisi once again hit out at the centre on Monday for not holding debate in the parliament over the recent skirmish between Indian and Chinese soldiers along the Line of Actual Control or LAC in Arunachal Pradesh's Tawang. He alleged that the Prime Minister Narendra Modi “misled the country by saying that no one has entered our territory”.

He said that the Indian Army is very courageous and it is the Government, Prime Minister which is weak and scared of China.

“The prime minister misled the country by saying that no one has entered our territory. There are satellite images that show that Chinese soldiers have occupied Depsang and Demchok. They will continue to grab our land yet the trade imbalance with them will continue?” ANI quoted Owaisi as saying.

He demanded an all-party meet or a debate in the parliament and said, "The government should tell us what decision it is taking on China. If the government shows political leadership, then the entire country will support them. The army is very powerful but the government is very weak and is scared of China.”

 He also said that the centre is foul playing and has kept the countrymen and the opposition in the dark about the situation at the border.

"The Modi government has kept the people and the Parliament in the dark. Why is it scared of the truth about China coming out? What is Modi's interest in hiding the facts about Chinese aggression?" tweeted Owaisi and attached a snippet of a news article regarding "Chinese aggression" along the LAC in Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh.

For more political news India In Hindi, subscribe to our newsletter.

[abhishekjagranplay]

Some Best Intermittent fasting Apps has lately come one of the most popular buzzwords in India and the world. These applications help in following up the most popular diet among the fitness enthusiasts, which allows an individual to limit the time of eating in a day to a certain window.

[mariacallous]

It was only a matter of time before Russia’s fast-growing shadow fleet, a group of vessels whose owners do their utmost to conceal their identity while carrying oil to evade sanctions on Moscow, started becoming a serious maritime risk. Russian vessels are now regularly turning down pilotage in Danish waters, the Financial Times reports—a practice that not only breaches maritime etiquette but could also lead to a disastrous accident.

The collision involving a container ship and Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge in the United States on March 26 demonstrates the dangers involved when bulky ships vessels through difficult waters. Indeed, the Dali struck the bridge despite being steered by two pilots. Even if just a small share of vessels turn down pilotage, similar disasters risk becoming commonplace.

International maritime rules strongly recommend the use of pilots with specialized local knowledge for most vessels sailing through Denmark’s Great Belt, the narrow passage between the country’s largest islands. The Great Belt is not just narrow—it also has treacherous waters and is extremely busy: Every year, some 70,000 vessels pass through the Great Belt and the nearby Sound (Oresund), which sits between the shores of Denmark and Sweden.  It’s standard practice to follow international maritime recommendations and take on an experienced local pilot when it comes to difficult navigation routes, whether that’s the Great Belt or the Suez Canal.

The Geography of the Danish Straits

For the sake of maritime order and safety, Copenhagen could block ships that refuse pilotage. That, though, might trigger a standoff with Russia—if Moscow admits its role as a patron of the shadow fleet. Indeed, blocking these rule-breaking vessels would itself violate international maritime rules. Before forcing such a choice, however, the open-source intelligence community could help by revealing the identities and whereabouts of shadow vessels’ owners.

Since the beginning of this year, at least 20 tankers that are suspected to be shadow vessels transporting Russian oil have refused to take Danish pilots on board, according to internal reports leaked to the Financial Times and the Danish research group Danwatch.

That’s at least 20 tankers that have sailed through the Baltic Sea—in most cases via the Gulf of Finland, passing through the exclusive economic zones of Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Sweden, and Germany—into Danish waters and the Great Belt, from which they have traveled on to Kattegat (comprising Danish and Swedish waters) and Skagerrak (Danish and Norwegian waters) and into the North Sea and the oceans that will bring them to their buyers in countries such as India and China.

Shadow vessels are clapped-out ships that spend their last remaining years providing transportation to and from sanctioned countries that official vessels and their owners won’t touch. The risk that these and other dark vessels pose to coastal states is further increased by the fact that they sail under the flags of countries unlikely to come to anyone’s aid if they cause accidents or incidents (Gabon is a particular favorite) and don’t undergo regular maintenance. Any accident—be it a collision or an oil leak—is likely to be doubly disastrous as a result.

Add to that the fact that their owners are hard to track down—and that they lack proper insurance. If a shadow vessel were to sustain a massive oil spill in, say, Finnish waters, Finnish authorities and taxpayers would end up on the hook. And shadow vessels are more likely than law-abiding ones to be involved in accidents since they frequently turn off their AIS (automatic identification system), a GPS-like navigation tool that allows vessels to see one another.

Since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russia’s attempts—often successful—to avoid sanctions have caused the shadow fleet to balloon; it’s currently thought to encompass some 1,400 vessels, though like all illicit activities, it’s impossible to measure precisely. (My report about the shadow fleet from last December provides an in-depth examination of the ships and the threats posed by them.)

If oil spills do occur, the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds assist the countries affected. But if oil and other toxic spills increase substantially, as they’re likely to do as a result of the shadow fleet, the fund won’t have enough money to compensate everyone.

So should Denmark simply block shadow vessels refusing pilotage, or all shadow vessels for that matter?

Not so fast. Yes, shadow vessels violate international maritime rules and conventions—but the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) gives all vessels the right of so-called innocent passage, meaning the right to sail through other countries’ territorial waters and exclusive economic zones. The fact that shadow vessels violate maritime rules doesn’t give coastal states the right to violate the rules in turn.

And, noted retired Rear Adm. Nils Wang—a former chief of the Danish Navy, which also covers a range of coast guard tasks—“according to international law, the Danish Straits are international straits and are not under Danish jurisdiction. For this reason, too, Denmark doesn’t have the legal right to force ships to use pilots.”

Though most ships follow the IMO’s recommendations and use pilotage, for which they pay a fee, over the years there have been some cheapskates that turned down pilotage.  In some cases, those ships caused oil spills. “Every time there’s a leak from a vessel that didn’t use pilotage, there’s an outcry to ban offenders, but we can’t,” Wang said.

Then, in the mid-2010s, the number of cheapskates traveling without pilotage grew.

Danish authorities got creative and announced that if ships with drafts (the amount that the extends beneath the waterline) of more than 11 meters (about 36 feet) didn’t request pilotage, then the Danish authorities would call them on VHF, the radio used by sailors, and remind them that they weren’t following international recommendations, and that Denmark would report them to their flag state and the IMO.

What’s more, a call on VHF allows every vessel in the vicinity to hear the conversation. “And then we started doing it,” Wang said. “And it changed behavior, because it was embarrassing for the ships and the captains to be called out like this. But if you’re part of the dark fleet, you don’t give a damn. Calling these vessels out won’t make a difference.”

Coastal states do have the right to block access in their territorial waters in certain cases—such as if transiting vessels are in poor repair or lack proper insurance. But when nations agreed and signed UNCLOS in 1982, a situation in which a country systematically evades globalization-based economic sanctions by using a fleet of dark vessels was inconceivable.

In response to the emergency of the shadow fleet, the world’s UNCLOS signatories could convene to make pilotage in sensitive waters mandatory. But such negotiations would take a long time, and under the current geopolitical conditions may never reach a conclusion. And because the Danish Straits are international waters, Denmark can’t impose new rules on its own.

This is globalization in a fiercely geopolitical era: Russia can invade Ukraine and evade the resulting sanctions by means of a fleet that sails through law-abiding countries’ waters—and their governments can’t stop it. On the contrary, with Russia now having joined Iran, Venezuela, and North Korea in using a shadow fleet, more countries will conclude that misbehaving and incurring economic sanctions is no big deal. And trade using dark vessels is cheaper than using legally operating ones.

An even larger shadow fleet would, of course, increase the risks both for marine wildlife and regular shipping. If a Russian shadow vessel collides in the Danish Straits with a legal merchant vessel, or even a Danish Navy vessel, what would Denmark do? What would NATO do?

But for now, there’s one group of dark-fleet operators that can be targeted completely legally and without risk of geopolitical escalation: the shadow vessels’ owners. They are plentiful and hide behind post office box addresses in countries such as the United Arab Emirates—because they don’t want to emerge from the shadows.

On the good side in this standoff, though, we have a large and growing community of open-source investigators, both professionals and amateurs. These investigators should take on a good deed for the global maritime order and investigate shadow-vessel owners, then share their identity and activities. Some may be hardened criminals immune to the embarrassment of public scrutiny, but many others may simply be ordinary businesspeople who have spotted an opportunity.

Just as with the ships once called out on Danish radio, public shame may be one way to force people to act for the better.

[printscore25]

LAC : Sino India Relationship

Over the past 3 years, the two asian giants are locked in a standoff. The standoff which started with provocative action by PLA led to casualties on both sides. Even after 3 years and 17 rounds of commander level meeting the issue remains unsolved in Debsang Bulge and Demchok.And both sides seem adamant for their part in the negotiations.One point worth discussing is that it's disengagement and moving behind a few kilometres not de-induction.

What is even more interesting is the reason for the entire fiasco by the chinese side. Experts have claimed multiple reasons for the action by the Chinese side.While we keep reading about headlines like it was purely a propaganda coup due to internal problems in china due to covid, some say due to abrogation of Article 370, etc. However, these could have played a part if we look at other aspects for standoff could be India's improved Infrastructure all along the LAC, a growing chinese assertiveness all along the areas of dispute whether be SCS or ECS or spartly islands dispute.Another reason could be to test India's preparedness in case of all out war for Taiwan & India's ability to change status quo of LAC during the taiwan conflict.

Also, at times the newspaper headline flashes with articles "India lost 1000's of sq. km of area."However, if we were to look at the actual ground situation then we could make much more pragmatic analysis of the entire standoff. The standoff resulted in areas of no patrolling which lead to very small pockets of grey areas where the border remains undefined.It is important to note that due to different line of perception, before the standoff both sides had patrolling rights to the current buffer zones created.

However, the bigger points of friction like that of Demchok and Debsang could not be looked through the same prism where line of perception varies vastly.

The chinese side seems to have not gained much strategic advantage with the entire standoff. For them it's a slap on the face as India is neither intimidated nor seems to give in to the pressure tactics. Rather it has led to unprecedented response from the Indian side to deter the PLA.

On the other hand, another interesting aspect is how western countries still have not gotten out of their western centric view assuming India needs their help to tackle the standoff.

Instead the army launched an operation called "Snow Leopard" in response to the unilateral action by china and took chinese by surprise and forced the chinese side for negotiations.

In the last 3 years the Army has inducted state of the art military equipment, has upgraded the existing airfields and the Advanced Landing Ground (ALGs) and built new Helipads, airstrips and improved connectivity with modern infrastructure even in the remotest areas of the Eastern sector.

What lays ahead for both sides is to resolve the remaining disputes and demarcate the boundary as neither has gained much and the entire standoff has resulted in stalemate.

[kneedeepincynade]

India must understand that China is stronger,China can defeat it and China will, India must decide if join the prosperity of the multipolar world or become a smoldering ruin of the unipolar one

The post is machine translated

Translation is at the bottom

The collective is on telegram

⚠️ LA "TATTICA DELL'AFFETTARE IL SALAME" DELL'ESERCITO POPOLARE DI LIBERAZIONE NEI TERRITORI CONTESI CON L'INDIA NAZIONALISTA PORTA I SUOI FRUTTI | L'INDIA PERDE 26 DEI 65 PUNTI DI PATTUGLIAMENTO NEL LADAKH ORIENTALE ⚠️

🇮🇳 L'India ha perso 26 dei 65 Punti di Pattugliamento nel Ladakh Orientale, lungo il confine con la Repubblica Popolare Cinese 🇨🇳

📄 È quanto scaturito da un Rapporto di un Alto Ufficiale di Polizia alla Conferenza Annuale dei Massimi Ufficiali di Polizia dell'India Nazionalista, tenutosi a Delhi - alla presenza del Primo Ministro Narendra Modi, del Ministro dell'Interno e del Consigliere per la Sicurezza Nazionale 🇮🇳

💬 "Attualmente ci sono 65 Punti di Pattugliamento a partire dal Passo di Karakorum fino a Chumur che devono essere pattugliati regolarmente dalle Forze Armate. Su 65, abbiamo perso la presenza in 26 Punti, a causa di un pattugliamento restrittivo o assente", ha affermato l'ufficiale.

⭐️ L'Esercito Popolare di Liberazione, nei Territori Contesi, e al confine con l'India Nazionalista (descritta come un paese-chiave su cui far leva per il sentimento anti-Cinese da Mike Pompeo) ha rafforzato la sua presenza - come si può leggere qui - e conduce una tattica definibile con l'espressione "affettare il salame", ovvero accaparrarsi - senza sparare un colpo - centimetro per centimetro, portando il nemico a perdere il controllo su certe aree 🪖

📟 Inoltre, l'EPL sta costruendo e posizionando sempre più apparecchiature di sorveglianza nelle "zone cuscinetto", con l'obiettivo di monitorare i movimenti delle Forze Armate Indiane 🇮🇳

🇨🇳 La scorsa settimana, Xi Jinping ha tenuto una video-conversazione con i soldati di stanza lungo il Confine Conteso tra Cina e India nel Ladakh Orientale, sottolineando l'importanza della preparazione e della prontezza al combattimento 🔥

📄 Per chi volesse approfondire il Tema dell'India Nazionalista e della Cooperazione Indo-Statunitense in funzione Anti-Cinese, così come i movimenti dell'Esercito Cinese sul confine con l'India, può rifarsi a questi post del Collettivo Shaoshan:

🔺Il Rapporto Indo-Statunitense in funzione anti-Cinese ⚔️

🔺 Tensioni tra la Repubblica Popolare Cinese e l'India Nazionalista - progetto ferroviario indiano al confine, territori contesi, presenza dell'EPL lungo la "linea di controllo effettivo", Pangong, Quartier Generale, Ponti e Stazioni Radar, Supporto Aereo: I, II, III, IV.

🌸 Iscriviti 👉 @collettivoshaoshan

⚠️ THE PEOPLE'S LIBERATION ARMY'S "SALAMI-SLICING TACTICS" IN DISPUTED TERRITORIES WITH NATIONALIST INDIA BRINGS FRUIT | INDIA LOSES 26 OF 65 PATROL POINTS IN EASTERN LADAKH ⚠️

🇮🇳India has lost 26 out of 65 Patrol Points in Eastern Ladakh, along the border with the People's Republic of China 🇨🇳

📄 This is what emerged from a Report by a Senior Police Officer at the Annual Conference of the Chief Police Officers of Nationalist India, held in Delhi - in the presence of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Home Minister and National Security Advisor 🇮🇳

💬 "Currently there are 65 Patrol Points starting from the Karakoram Pass up to Chumur that need to be patrolled regularly by the Armed Forces. Out of 65, we have lost presence in 26 Points, due to restricted or no patrolling," he said officer.

⭐️ The People's Liberation Army, in the Disputed Territories, and on the border with Nationalist India (described as a key country to leverage anti-China sentiment by Mike Pompeo) has strengthened its presence - how can read here - and carries out a tactic that can be defined with the expression "slicing salami", or rather grabbing - without firing a shot - centimeter by centimetre, leading the enemy to lose control over certain areas 🪖

📟 Also, the PLA is building and placing more and more surveillance equipment in the "buffer zones", aiming to monitor the movements of the Indian Armed Forces 🇮🇳

🇨🇳 Xi Jinping held a video conversation with soldiers stationed along the Sino-Indian Border in Eastern Ladakh last week, emphasizing the importance of preparedness and combat readiness 🔥

📄 For those wishing to learn more about Nationalist India and Indo-US Cooperation in an Anti-Chinese function, as well as the movements of the Chinese Army on the border with India, you can refer to these posts from the Shaoshan Collective:

🔺 The Indo-US Report in anti-Chinese function ⚔️

🔺 Tensions between PRC and Nationalist India - Indian railway project on border, disputed territories, PLA presence along "Line of Effective Control", Pangong, HQ, Bridges and Radar Stations, Air Support: I, II, III, IV.

🌸 Subscribe 👉 @collettivoshaoshan

[xnewsinfo]

China and India attain consensus on troop withdrawal in Ladakh, sustaining dialogue for battle decision and respecting bilateral peace agreements. File | Photograph credit score: Getty Pictures China and India have managed to "slender variations" and construct "some consensus" on troop withdrawal from friction factors to finish the standoff in japanese Ladakh and agreed to keep up dialogue to succeed in a mutually acceptable decision at an "early date", the Chinese language Protection Ministry stated on Thursday (September 26, 2024).Below the management of two leaders, China and India have maintained communication with one another by means of diplomatic and army channels, together with between two International Ministers and China's International Minister and India's Nationwide Safety Advisor, since by means of border session mechanisms, stated Mr. Zhang Xiaogang.Each China and India, by means of talks, had been capable of "cut back their variations and construct some consensus, in addition to conform to strengthen dialogue to accommodate one another's reliable issues," stated Mr. Zhang, a spokesman for the Ministry of Nationwide Protection. , at a press convention in Beijing."The 2 sides agreed to succeed in a decision at an early date that's acceptable to either side," he stated.He was replying to a query on talks between the 2 international locations on disengagement from remaining friction factors, particularly Demchok and Depsang, to finish the greater than four-year-old army standoff in japanese Ladakh, which resulted in a freeze of relations between the 2 international locations.Mr. Zhang referred to the assembly between Exterior Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar and Chinese language International Minister Wang Yi, in addition to the current assembly on the sidelines of the BRICS assembly in Russia between Wang and Nationwide Safety Advisor Ajit Doval.On September 3, Chinese language International Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning, commenting on talks between Wang and Doval, stated that "the frontline armies of the 2 international locations have achieved disengagement in 4 areas within the western sector." of the China-India border, together with the Galwan Valley.In his response to the query, Mr. Zhang didn't touch upon the progress of the disengagement from the remaining areas, together with Depsang and Demchok, however stated either side will proceed to consolidate the outcomes."We are going to proceed to consolidate the outcomes we now have achieved and respect bilateral agreements and confidence-building measures to safeguard peace and tranquility on the border," he stated.His touch upon the bilateral agreements got here as Jaishankar, whereas addressing an occasion organised by the Asia Society and the Asia Society Coverage Institute in New York on Tuesday (September 24, 2024), stated there have been plenty of agreements between the 2 international locations that got here into power. There have been increasingly particulars on how to make sure that the border remained peaceable and secure."Now the issue was that in 2020, regardless of these very express agreements, we noticed that the Chinese language (we had been all in the midst of Covid on the time) moved numerous forces in violation of those agreements to the Line of Management Actual. And we responded in the identical manner," he stated.In the meantime, Li Jinsong, director-general of the Asian Affairs Division of the Ministry of Exterior Affairs, met Indian Ambassador to China Pradeep Kumar Rawat right here, the Chinese language International Ministry stated, with out offering any particulars. Printed - September 26, 2024 10:45 pm IST

[code-of-conflict]

The Future of AI and Conflict: Scenarios for India-China Relations

Introduction: AI at the Center of India-China Dynamics

As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to evolve, it is reshaping the geopolitical landscape, particularly in the context of India-China relations. AI offers both unprecedented opportunities for peace and collaboration, as well as heightened risks of conflict. The trajectory of the relationship between these two Asian powers—already marked by border tensions, economic competition, and geopolitical rivalry—could be significantly influenced by their respective advancements in AI. This post explores possible future scenarios where AI could either deepen hostilities or become a cornerstone of peacebuilding between India and China.

Scenario 1: AI as a Tool for Escalating Conflict

In one possible trajectory, AI advancements exacerbate existing tensions between India and China, leading to an arms race in AI-driven military technology. China’s rapid progress in developing AI-enhanced autonomous weaponry, surveillance systems, and cyber capabilities positions it as a formidable military power. If unchecked, this could lead to destabilization in the region, particularly along the disputed Line of Actual Control (LAC). China’s integration of AI into military-civil fusion policies underscores its strategy to use AI across both civilian and military sectors, raising concerns in India and beyond​.

India, in response, may feel compelled to accelerate its own AI-driven defense strategies, potentially leading to an arms race. Although India has made strides in AI research and development, it lacks the scale and speed of China’s AI initiatives. An intensification of AI-related militarization could further deepen the divide between the two nations, reducing opportunities for diplomacy and increasing the risk of miscalculation. Autonomous weapons systems, in particular, could make conflicts more likely, as AI systems operate at speeds beyond human control, leading to unintended escalations.

Scenario 2: AI and Cybersecurity Tensions

Another potential area of conflict lies in the realm of AI-enhanced cyber warfare. China has already demonstrated its capabilities in offensive cyber operations, which have included espionage and cyberattacks on India’s critical infrastructure​. The most notable incidents include cyberattacks during the 2020 border standoff, which targeted Indian power grids and government systems. AI can significantly enhance the efficiency and scale of such attacks, making critical infrastructure more vulnerable to disruption.

In the absence of effective AI-based defenses, India’s cybersecurity could be a significant point of vulnerability, further fueling distrust between the two nations. AI could also be used for disinformation campaigns and psychological warfare, with the potential to manipulate public opinion and destabilize political systems in both countries. In this scenario, AI becomes a double-edged sword, increasing not only the technological capabilities of both nations but also the likelihood of conflict erupting in cyberspace​.

Scenario 3: AI as a Catalyst for Diplomatic Cooperation

However, AI also holds the potential to be a catalyst for peace if both India and China recognize the mutual benefits of collaboration. AI can be harnessed to improve conflict prevention through early warning systems that monitor border activities and detect escalations before they spiral out of control. By developing shared AI-driven monitoring platforms, both nations could enhance transparency along contested borders like the LAC, reducing the chances of accidental skirmishes​.

Moreover, AI can facilitate dialogue on broader issues like disaster management and environmental protection, areas where both India and China share common interests. Climate change, for instance, poses a significant threat to both countries, and AI-driven solutions can help manage water resources, predict natural disasters, and optimize agricultural productivity. A collaborative framework for AI in these non-military domains could serve as a confidence-building measure, paving the way for deeper cooperation on security issues​.

Scenario 4: AI Governance and the Path to Peace

A more optimistic scenario involves India and China working together to establish international norms and governance frameworks for the ethical use of AI. Both nations are increasingly involved in global AI governance discussions, though their approaches differ. China, while focusing on strategic dominance, is also participating in international forums like the ISO to shape AI standards. India, on the other hand, advocates for responsible and inclusive AI, emphasizing transparency and ethical considerations​.

A shared commitment to creating ethical AI frameworks, particularly in the military sphere, could prevent AI from becoming a destabilizing force. India and China could jointly advocate for global agreements on the regulation of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) and AI-enhanced cyber warfare, reducing the risk of unchecked AI proliferation. By working together on AI governance, both nations could shift the narrative from AI as a tool for conflict to AI as a force for global peace and stability.

Conclusion: The Crossroads of AI and India-China Relations

The future of India-China relations in the AI age is uncertain, with both risks and opportunities on the horizon. While AI could exacerbate existing tensions by fueling an arms race and increasing cyber vulnerabilities, it also offers unprecedented opportunities for conflict prevention and cooperation. The direction that India and China take will depend on their willingness to engage in dialogue, establish trust, and commit to ethical AI governance. As the world stands on the brink of a new era in AI-driven geopolitics, India and China must choose whether AI will divide them further or bring them closer together in pursuit of peace.

[tfgadgets]

How New 'Mountain Tank' Will Enhance Army's Combat Capabilities

The first phase of trials have been successfully completed. New Delhi: Learning lessons from the standoff with China in Eastern Ladakh and fine-tuning them by observing what’s been happening in the war between Russia and Ukraine, the Defence Research and Development Organisation has developed India’s first ‘mountain tank’, Zorawar, which successfully completed its first phase of trials on…

[novumtimes]

Indigenous light tank Zorawar completes preliminary automotive trials

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) successfully conducted the preliminary automotive trials of the Indian light tank, Zorawar, meant for deployment in high-altitude areas, it said on Friday. “During the field trials conducted in the desert terrain, the Light Tank demonstrated exceptional performance, efficiently meeting all the intended objectives. In the initial phase, the tank’s firing performance was rigorously evaluated and it achieved the required accuracy on designated targets,” the DRDO said in a statement. Zorawar has been developed by the Combat Vehicles Research & Development Establishment (CVRDE), under DRDO, in collaboration with Larsen & Toubro Limited. Indian industry including Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises contributed to the development of various sub-systems, showcasing the strength of indigenous defence manufacturing capabilities within the country, the statement said. Union Defence Minister Rajnath Singh described the achievement as a significant milestone towards India’s goal of self-reliance in critical defence systems and technologies. In April 2021, the Army issued a Request For Information (RFI) for the procurement of 350 light tanks weighing less than 25 tonnes in a phased manner, along with performance-based logistics, niche technologies, engineering support packages, and other maintenance and training requirements. Following this DRDO and L&T teamed up to develop a light tank. At the height of the ongoing standoff in Eastern Ladakh, following the confrontation on the Kailash range on the south bank of Pangong Tso in August 2020 India and China had deployed tanks on the mountain peaks which were subsequently pulled back as part of the disengagement from both banks of the lake. It was during the standoff that the Army felt the need for a light tank to operate at 15,000 feet for easy deployment and manoeuvrability, though it initially denied any such need. Published – September 14, 2024 02:55 am IST Source link via The Novum Times

[uniqueeval]

The Hindu Morning Digest: August 30, 2024

People Liberation Army (PLA) soldiers and tanks during military disengagement along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) at the India-China border in Ladakh. | Photo Credit: AFP India, China hold 31st border affairs meeting to resolve standoff at LAC India and China had a “frank, constructive and forward-looking exchange of views” on the situation along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) to “narrow…

[m9sworld]

Will BRICS member India help the US in the tech standoff with China? The...

[thedhananjayaparkhe]

Geopolitical newslinks shared by a friend on Whatsapp

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_FMeErjXbw Galwan And After: Reality Check On India-China Relations | #galwan #india #china #indiachina StratNewsGlobal 13 MAY 2024 Four years after the Galwan clash and the military standoff between India and China that continues to this day, what lessons can one draw from it? Is there a way forward?  Will China continue its belligerent course or does a recent…

[mariacallous]

As Ukraine accelerates its counteroffensive across several sections of the front, a rational person might conclude that 2023 must surely be the last year of Russia’s war against its neighbor. Russian military resources are depleted, Moscow’s long and bloody winter offensive in the Donbas has yielded meager results, and Russian society longs for the return of prewar stability. Logic dictates that the Kremlin has no better option than to seize any opportunity to cut short its disastrous war, saving face as far as possible by clinging to the shreds of its territorial gains. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken echoed this line of thinking at a press conference this week, when he said that a successful Ukrainian counteroffensive could have the effect of “causing Putin to finally focus on negotiating an end to the war that he started.”

Such calculations, however, are based on rational cost-benefit analysis and underestimate the extent to which this war is the personal project of one man: Russian President Vladimir Putin. He started it single-handedly, based on his own distorted perceptions and disregarding the opinion of Russian society and ruling elites. He has continued to wage it for more than a year, defying all common sense, and there is no indication that he will ever wish to stop it. Indeed, continuing the war brings him numerous political benefits, while stopping it would offer him little but new risks.

There is no doubt that Russian elites and society largely share Putin’s resentment of the West, disregard for Ukrainian statehood, and belief that Russia is a great power entitled to use military force against other states at will. There is little sympathy for the plight of the Ukrainians among Russians of all social standing, and even less appetite for turning Russia into a democratic and responsible member of the international community. Still, many Russians significantly diverge with Putin on how much they are prepared to sacrifice in the standoff with the West.

With all the caveats about conducting opinion polls in authoritarian states, surveys indicate that steadfast popular support for Putin does not preclude the majority of Russians from perceiving their current situation as extremely stressful and welcoming immediate peace talks with Ukraine—whatever that may mean, as it’s unclear how many Russians would support giving up any of the conquered territories. Private conversations among the Russian elites also reveal major discontent with the mounting costs of the war and no understanding of its purpose. Still, the invasion goes on according to Putin’s wishes, and no one in Russia has the means to override his will.

For Putin, the invasion presents an easy way to implement the goals he had struggled for years to realize in peacetime. This has always been Putin’s trademark style of ruling: He believes that direct attempts to steer the leviathan of the Russian state are futile, and instead prefers to force the system to adapt to crises and faits accomplis he himself created.

With the invasion of Ukraine, Putin has honed this managerial approach to perfection. With one decision, he created enough momentum to send Russia hurtling in the direction of developments he has long wanted to see. Take the reorientation of Russia’s foreign trade to make it less dependent on the West, which Putin has aimed for since 2014. Eight years of devising strategies, elaborating policies, and taking various piecemeal steps all achieved less than one year of all-out war. In 2022, the country’s trade turnover with Europe more than halved, while trade with China grew by more than 40 percent and grew 2.6 times with India.

For years, Russia’s businesses and inept bureaucracy struggled to develop the infrastructure needed for cooperation with Asia. But the war has led Russia to mobilize its resources and finance a range of Asia-oriented transport projects, from a railway link to the Indian Ocean via Iran and Azerbaijan (which had been discussed since 2005) to a new gas pipeline to China, which is now within reach after more than a decade of talks. Decreasing Russia’s dependency on the U.S. dollar and Western financial system has been the government’s priority since the 1990s, but it took a full-scale war to reduce the share of Russian exports paid in U.S. dollars or euros from nearly 90 percent in January 2022 to below 50 percent in December of the same year.

Objectives such as substituting Western imports with domestic products, having Russians vacation inside the country, and restoring the prestige of the Russian armed forces have been on Putin’s agenda for decades, but in the end, only war proved capable of making Russian bureaucrats, businessmen, and wider society implement them for real. Parts of the Moscow elite might still enjoy their Italian villas, Mediterranean yachts, and French delicacies, but their numbers shrink every time the West introduces another package of sanctions.

The international developments brought on by the war dovetail even more closely with Putin’s long-held ambitions. Minsk’s involvement in the aggression against Ukraine has sealed Belarus’s isolation from the West and pushed the country into unprecedented integration with Russia—with little pressure required from Moscow. Meanwhile, Europe’s loss of access to cheap Russian gas is a permanent thorn in the side of trans-Atlantic unity, potentially creating new sources of tension between Europe and the United States.

The freezing of the Russian Central Bank’s foreign reserves has flamed fears around the globe that Washington and Brussels will weaponize their currencies for other purposes. Russia’s war has also created a new bone of contention between the West and China. Many developing countries have seized on it to be more assertive toward the United States and Europe.

In reality, of course, none of these developments are as straightforward as they may look to Putin—and their costs for Russia are immense. But the key lesson he has drawn from Russian history is that if you want to achieve something worthy in such a vast and disorganized country, the cost will inevitably be high. While the losses will fade with time, the achievements will be remembered by later generations. And even if the costs are high, Putin has not found anything that can rival the war in its destructive efficiency for shaping the history of Russia and the world.

In contrast, Putin himself has little to gain from stopping the war any time soon, especially if the Ukrainian counteroffensive proves successful. Sure, ending the war would save thousands of lives, significantly relieve the pressure on the Russian economy and society, allow Russia to stabilize its international position, and so on. But for Putin personally, putting a stop to the conflict would be a disaster for his position in Russian domestic politics and history.

No matter how repressive the Russian regime has become, ending the war would inevitably prompt public reflection. There would be many questions about the invasion’s purposes, its high cost, and whether the result justified that cost. Moreover, Putin would have to face those questions in a situation where it would no longer be possible to justify harsher repression by citing the exceptional circumstances of war.

Regardless of how worn-out Russians may be, therefore, Putin will stick to his selective perception of reality, looking for reasons for and ways to further escalate his addictive crusade against the current world order. Putin has not even made any bones about his intentions: His key decisions over the past months—from tightening the military draft system to massively investing in weapons production—clearly indicate that he is bracing his country for a long war. It is hard to see how the upcoming Ukrainian counteroffensive could affect these calculations, regardless of how successful it turns out to be.

No one in Russia appears to be able to stop Putin, but that is not to say they are eager to continue his undertaking once he is out of the picture. Even then, Russia is unlikely to get a democratically inclined, let alone pro-Western leadership. Rather, Putin will most likely be succeeded by a group of his henchmen who share a similar world outlook, including his view of the West and Ukraine. Still, even if autocratic and paranoid, the next Russian leadership is bound to be less oriented toward a single man at the top. It has been a consistent pattern in Russian and Soviet history that harsh autocratic rulers purged any potential rivals so thoroughly that their departure was inevitably followed by a less powerful, more collective leadership, with none of its members able to impose their whims on all the others. By the very fact of being a collective, Russia’s rulers after Putin will inevitably tread more cautiously, elaborate decisions more thoroughly, and react more rationally, especially on the issues related to the war.

This difference may prove decisive. Given the current state of ever-increasing tensions, it is worth pondering the question of who in Russia is more likely to press the nuclear button: a lonely autocrat obsessed with historical grandeur, or a group of gray apparatchiks bogged down in their internal squabbles? The wrong answer may cost us the planet.

[cavenewstimes]

China says 'great positive progress' made to resolve border row with India

NEW DELHI: A Chinese foreign ministry official on Friday said that China and India have made “great positive progress” to resolve the border standoff, with both sides maintaining close communication throughout the process. This statement by foreign ministry spokesperson Mao Ning were elaborated on China’s response to Prime Minister Narendra Modi ‘s recent comments in which he said that for New…

[kspp]

NEP 2020 : How can India become center for public policy education in next five years?

Instead of looking at public policy professionals to be anchored in just arts and humanities, India must create a new generation of nation builders trained in Public Policy and learn from diverse disciplines such as law, management, technology, economics, and humanities.

India is a desirable destination in the global higher education space. Our demographic dividend will allow us to have the highest population of young people globally over the next decade. We need to reset our higher education offerings that will be in sync with our nation’s emerging needs and our region and the world.

When we take a closer look at the arena of public policy, specifically – India’s Act East policy has far-reaching implications in entire Southeast Asia. Over the years, China’s policies ranging from greater engagement with ASEAN, the formation of the Shangai Cooperation Organisation, debt diplomacy, and the recent Belt Road Initiative, show a reordering of the regional dynamics.

The US-China standoff, changing relations between countries in the middle east, etc., will lead to the emergence of new world order.

Domestically speaking, the repealing of close to 1500 acts during the 2014 to 2019 Lok Sabha tenure is an impressive feat considering that less than 2000 acts were repealed over the previous six decades. The emphasis on “Minimum Government Maximum Governance” and attempts to increase the “Ease of Doing Business” all point to a fresh impetus to change the way governance was done in India till recently.

As the 2012 article by CommonWealth Foundation says – “Governance is too important and complex to be left to governments alone.” Good governance will be brought about only when Society, Businesses, and Government come together and explore ways of working together to usher in more citizen-centric governance mechanisms. For a long time, in India and many other countries, public policymaking has been the domain of mainly the bureaucracy. What began in the UK under John Major, the “Citizen Charter” movement, has over the last decade resulted in various states starting to deliver the “Right to Public Services.”

Innovation in different fields: Further innovation by multiple states like Delhi, Karnataka, and other states, many public services are being offered at the doorstep. Other stakeholders’ inputs and opinions are rarely sought in a welcoming manner, and even if suggestions are received, they are less likely to be incorporated. The journey of “Changing the way we govern ourselves” demands the best and the brightest to be involved in nation-building and continue to become more citizen and business-friendly.

NEP aims to increase gross enrollment ratio: The National Education Policy 2020 rightly identifies the need to double the Gross Enrollment Ration to 50 percent by 2035 from the GER of 2018, which stood at 26.3 percent. The higher educational institutions across disciplines will have to add over three crore seats.

New generation of nation-builders: Instead of looking at public policy professionals to be anchored in just arts and humanities, India must create a new generation of nation builders trained in Public Policy and learn from diverse disciplines such as law, management, technology, economics, and humanities.

In addition to the reconfiguration of geopolitics, innovation in public services delivery, rapid advances in technology, and its implications necessitate progressive regulation to protect the privacy and thwart the threat of a jobless future. All of this adds to the need for professionalizing public policy. NEP rightfully encourages holistic and multidisciplinary education.

Emphasis must be to provide lifelong learning as compared to the long-standing – “finish college” and then “start working” mindset.

The logical fallout from NEP should lead well-functioning higher educational Institutions to dream big and move away from centrally controlled by cumbersome and lengthy Government regulations. NEP implementation should encourage them to become board-administered autonomous institutions that will respond to the country’s diverse needs and beyond.

The present-day, low-trust, high-touch regulatory approach needs to be replaced with a trust-but-verify mode, giving the better performing institutions greater autonomy to develop long-term roadmaps for emerging areas like public policy.

Different public policy courses: Public policy courses designed to keep Indian ethos with the western public policy frameworks will be essential ingredients to move towards a better-governed nation given the above set of conditions. Our students and faculty must blend ancient wisdom from texts like Kautilya’s Arthashastra, Bhartrihari’s Niti Shatakam, and others that capture the local realities and cultural context.

These texts cover various aspects of governance, ranging from ethics, economics, law, politics, military, spies, intelligence to logistics when combined with proven western governance mechanisms that have given excellent results.

With every crisis comes an opportunity to leapfrog to a new normal. Many lessons from India are relevant to the Commonwealth countries, South and Southeast Asian countries that share similar governance mechanisms.

As cooperative federalism is taking more center stage, many more opportunities will open up at the state level along with the national level for bringing in these reforms in the government sector. Many new areas are getting deregulated and opened up.

Many businesses will look out for public policy specialists who can advise them during this transitionary phase. India’s CSR spends from BSE 100 companies itself crossed 10,000 crores in FY19-20. Also, many not-for-profits raise large grants nationally and internationally will benefit from professionals with a good grounding in public policy education.

All the above aspects augur well for India powered by the National Education Policy to become a hotbed for public policy education. India will become a powerhouse for innovations that will usher in a citizen-centric and inclusive future for all.

[code-of-conflict]

AI, Cybersecurity, and National Sovereignty

Introduction: The Role of AI in Cybersecurity

As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes integral to national security, cyber threats increasingly exploit AI-driven vulnerabilities. Both India and China face the challenge of securing their cyber infrastructure while mitigating espionage and offensive cyber operations. The risks include large-scale data breaches, intellectual property theft, and attacks on critical infrastructure. With AI enhancing the scope and speed of cyberattacks, national sovereignty is increasingly threatened by cyber vulnerabilities that transcend borders.

AI-Driven Cyber Threats and Espionage

China has heavily integrated AI into its cyber capabilities, using it to enhance espionage, cyber warfare, and information manipulation. AI-enabled cyber operations allow China to gather vast amounts of intelligence data through advanced hacking techniques. These tools are often deployed through state-sponsored groups, exploiting zero-day vulnerabilities and penetrating government and corporate networks worldwide​.

For example, in 2021, China was accused of orchestrating a large-scale cyber-attack targeting Microsoft Exchange servers, affecting over 30,000 organizations globally. This attack was designed to facilitate espionage, capturing sensitive information ranging from corporate intellectual property to government data​. China's cyber operations underscore the increasing use of AI in orchestrating sophisticated, large-scale intrusions that threaten national sovereignty.

India, while lagging behind China in offensive cyber capabilities, faces persistent cyber espionage threats from Chinese state-sponsored actors. The most notable incidents occurred during the 2020 India-China border standoff, where Chinese hackers targeted India's critical infrastructure, including power grids and government networks​. These attacks highlight the vulnerabilities in India's cybersecurity architecture and its need to enhance AI-driven defenses.

Vulnerabilities and National Sovereignty

AI-driven cyber threats pose significant risks to national sovereignty. For India, the challenges are magnified by the relatively underdeveloped nature of its cybersecurity infrastructure. Although the establishment of the Defence Cyber Agency in 2018 marked a step forward, India still lacks the offensive cyber capabilities and AI sophistication of China​. India's defensive posture primarily focuses on securing critical infrastructure and mitigating cyber intrusions, but it remains vulnerable to cyber espionage and attacks on its digital economy.

China's integration of AI into both military and civilian cyber systems, through its Military-Civil Fusion policy, has bolstered its ability to conduct large-scale cyber operations with deniability. This fusion allows China to leverage private sector innovations for military purposes, making it a formidable cyber power in the Indo-Pacific region​.

Case Studies: Cyber Confrontations

In 2019, a significant cyberattack targeted India's Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant, which was traced back to North Korea, but was believed to be part of a broader effort involving Chinese actors. This incident highlighted the potential for AI-enhanced malware to target critical infrastructure, posing severe risks to national security.

Similarly, the 2020 Mumbai blackout, reportedly linked to Chinese hackers, emphasized how AI-driven cyberattacks can disrupt essential services, creating chaos in times of geopolitical tension​. These incidents illustrate how AI-driven cyber capabilities are increasingly weaponized, posing severe risks to India's sovereignty and its ability to protect critical infrastructure.

Implications for Future Conflicts

As AI continues to evolve, the cyber domain will become a primary battleground in future conflicts between India and China. AI-enhanced cyber operations provide both nations with the ability to conduct espionage, sabotage, and information warfare remotely, without direct military engagement. For China, these tools are integral to its broader geopolitical strategy, while India must develop its AI and cybersecurity capabilities to protect its national sovereignty and counteract cyber threats​.

Conclusion

The integration of AI into cybersecurity poses both opportunities and challenges for India and China. While China has aggressively developed AI-driven cyber capabilities, India faces an urgent need to enhance its defenses and develop its offensive cyber tools. As cyberattacks become more sophisticated, driven by AI, both nations will continue to grapple with the implications of these developments on national sovereignty and global security.