The Middle Kingdom Wallas

bbabu #132 It is true that the Chinese and Japanese relations too are burdened by history - if the Japanese invaded China in the 20th century, the Chinese (under Kublai Khan) tried to invade Japan with a large fleet in the 13th century - the fact that the invasion failed due to the ``divine wind`` (or ``kamikaze``) which was a typhoon that wrecked the chinese fleet only put an imprint on japanese memories that lasted centuries (with the term ``kamikaze`` being resurrected in WWII by the japanese to refer to their suicide pilots).

HOWEVER, the fact is that japan is today one of the biggest investors in China despite this hatred. And the fact is that the japanese have today become the trend setters in modern fashions and culture - not just for the chinese but for other far east nations as well as for the US and the west as well.

Taiwan is a different case altogether - there are no historical bitternesses, and China simply sees it as a ``renegade province`` that will one day come back to the fold. That is very different from the Pakistan-India situation where there is no question that Pakistan is here to stay as a proud and independent nation (and the military means to back this, unlike Taiwan).

amit #130 There is no doubt that after coming close together in the 1950`s as part of the non-aligned movement, indo-chinese relations turned sour in 1962. I think you go too far in blaming the chinese psyche for this, though. I checked the internet to check on the events that led to the war, and it seems to me that it was the result of loosely defined borders with the Chinese that Indian government inherited in 1947 which resulted in border tensions between the two countries going back to the 1950`s even as they became partners in the non-aligned movement. Here is one link I looked at that refers to a british writer (Maxwell) who discusses this at length: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/DK01Df04.html

I have no doubt that the brits had aggressively defined the indo-chinese border (given the general trend of imperialist (british, french and later japanese) bullying of china in the 19th and 20th centuries. Thus, I dont think that this is as much a black and white issue of chinese treachery and the victimization of india. But perhaps you have some additional facts to shed light on this.

re: #117 by harish_hyd
``In a vast and diverse, and often fractious nation, such things will happen ...``.
We are talking about the death of more than 1000 innocent men, women and children who had nothing whatsoever to do with politics and whose only fault was that they were muslims.
Such things should not happen in an enlightened democracy but, as i have already said before, India is not an enlightened democracy.
Can u imagine such things happening in USA? Can a Governor of any state in US preside over a riot where 1000 people are killed and still stay in his job? He will be facing the ire of press, public and would have faced criminal charges.
Modi did not even own up responsibility. He is still the C.M. Can this happen anywhere else?
Indians feel proud of their democracy but in times like this, they fail the acid test.
Sridhar

Re:tahmed32#128

We Indians have already seen what kind of friendship we can get from the Chinese, thanks to circa 1962. We have no illusions about them, they are an opportunist people who look down on South Asians and want to establish their domination over us. That is the only reason that they have an alliance with Pakistan, not because they have any great affinity for you. It is their way of using you as a pawn for keeping India in check, so that they dont have any competition in Asia.

Of course, it is a great desi tradition of always going to externall powers to seek their help in our fight against fellow desis. So you are doing what comes naturally to us desis - fighting with each other with the help of external powers, even as we become poorer and the external powers become richer and mightier.

aquaris
//......They were never on conflicting path...at least not for long...... //

That right. The chinese were lucky that way - they never had to deal with Islamic ideology and its followers. Even though they have endured their share of marauding forces.

But they have lived and learnt. And they are going to go third degree on your brothers in Xinjiang :) Kashmir, in comparison, would be a picnic.

So - get rid of mullahs, closet-mullahs, talibans and other assorted freaks you pakis have been feeding and breeding for decades. Also, get rid of those jihad collection boxes. And do it fast - otherwise don`t count on ``steadfast friend of 40 years``.

tahmed32 #128

`` For the benefit of our Indian friends on chowk (who of course, as per the posts below, are vastly superior to us poor Pakistanis in everything!!), I would note that friendship with china of course does not need to come at the expense of friendship with India - however, there remains a basic difference in the nature of these relations: at the human level, relations with India are much for subject to ``mood swings`` than relations with China with whom the relations are more rational and businesslike and in a basic spirit of friendship and fairplay without any hangups on who did what to whom over the centuries. ``

Tell the Chinese next time a Japanese politician praises the WW II Japanese Army or when a country invites a Taiwanese leader. Everybody has their hangovers.

mannyd: further to my post #126, I see I misread the highest number for civilian deaths in the table below, which is 15-20 m., not 71 m. My mistake. But, to repeat, it is not the exact count that is important - the basic point I made was that the Japanese wreaked enormous casualties on the Chinese.

aquaris #115 And pakistainis have a soft spot for the chinese - for good reason: they have proven to be steadfast friends for the past 40 years. And individual chinese are very impressive in terms of their simplicity and dedication to work. I once had the opportunity to stand in for a few days for a friend who taught english to chinese students visiting Pakistan - I just loved the dedication with which they studied, and the very respectful attitude towards me since I was their teacher. Also, back in the 1960`s, a pakistani military delegation was (as I understand) told by chou-en lai that it was in Pakistan`s interest to develop its own military capacity since the old generation of chinese leaders was fading away and the next generation may not be as inclined to military cooperation with Pakistan - the spirit of true fellowship in which he said that was greatly appreciated by the Pakistanis. And of course time has shown that the Chinese have been steadfast in their friendship with Pakistan - and I think this has to do with a number of human factors as well as of course the commonality of strategic interests of both countries.

For the benefit of our Indian friends on chowk (who of course, as per the posts below, are vastly superior to us poor Pakistanis in everything!!), I would note that friendship with china of course does not need to come at the expense of friendship with India - however, there remains a basic difference in the nature of these relations: at the human level, relations with India are much for subject to ``mood swings`` than relations with China with whom the relations are more rational and businesslike and in a basic spirit of friendship and fairplay without any hangups on who did what to whom over the centuries.

nikki, dont worry, udupi restaurants are not ``copied`` by our other southesian brothers, only the panjabi ones. but then the udupis are veg, so that is a major limitation for world domination!

The Xinjiang Muslim problem is a recent phenomena.... at least it has raised its ugly head after the USA sponsored..... Jihad in Afghanistan....and then the liberation of central asian muslim countries.... like the various istans..... we see now....

.....the situation was worsned...by the consistent pouring In of the Mullahs from the Madrassass.... bordering Pakistan and Afghanistan.....
these mullahs suddenly found..... GOD..... giving them another reason for Jihad....

...so this xingjiang problem ....... for chineese.....

...But still........ skim throuhg all the posts in this very.... topic.... especially by our learned....and well informed contributers..... who have given excellent historical prespective about the chineese and Islamic relations since .... the advent of Islam...

....They were never on conflicting path...at least not for long......

........and chineese have repeatedly saved Pakistan through their prudent and practical policies.... the Latest being the Hong Kong Issue.... Other wise..... the powers....that matter Like USA and Uk.... etc..etc.... had created.... the JinnahPur Boggey.....with the frontman as Altaf Bhai.... ( a la Bombay Underworld......).....which for the time being it seems has been shelved...... ever wonder.... How and Why they even created an International Sectriat....with firmly established offices in UN....

Yes I agree with Just One of your point.....

If pakistanis do not reign In these ..... Half- illetrate Mullahs.... really they did not even have the complete knowledge of Islam.... and they... pick up only those things from....Islam which suits them....
....Just consider..... Marriage is a bargain... they sell and buy..... their women openly...in the Frontier area.... also....they approve... Other non-islamic acts...which are against the very essense of Islam...on the Name of tradition....
where as Islam..... Broke those inhuman traditions.....And given them free reign like they are getting Now... No wonder.... within.... a few Years... Pakistanis will loose their only reliable friend China.....

mannyd: My point was that the Japanese wreaked enormous casualties in China. That point remains valid, regardless of the exact number which no one knows.


As for the exact number, I have cut and paste various figures that pop up on the first link provided when you google ``china deaths world war ii`` (military death estimates are given first, then civilian). Looking at these numbers it seems that it is quite safe to assume that there were at least 12 million civilian and 3 million military deaths between 1937 (when Japanese attacked China) and 1945 (when Japanese surrendered to the MacArthur). If you take into account other things - the tens of millions of chinese rendered homeless and thus exposed to higher death rates; the much larger ratio of civilian to military deaths in China compared to other nations with civilian deaths being typically more difficult to account than military, and so on) - the number becomes larger. And the highest figures in the table below add up to well over the ``hyperbole`` that you noted in my post - the highest military number (as you can see in the table) being 6.4 million, and the highest civilian estimated deaths (also in table) being a little over 71 million.

Anyway, as I said, the point of my post remains valid regardless of the exact number.




Military:
Britannica: 1,310,224 (Nationalists, 1937-45)
Compton`s: 1,310,224 (Nationalists, 1937-45)
HarperCollins: 1,324,000
Clodfelter
KMT: 1,319,958 KIA
Communists: admit to 500,000 d., but true toll probably 2M soldiers + civilians in Comm. areas.
Total: 3M
Info. Please: 1,324,516 (Nationalists, 1937-45)
Ellis: 1,400,000
Eckhardt: 650,000 (1937-41, incl. Japanese), 1,350,000 (1941-45)
Small & Singer: 750,000 (1937-41), 1,350,000 (after Dec. 1941)
Wallechinsky: 2,219,958
Nationalists (1937-45): 1,319,958
Communists: 500,000
non-Comm. guerrillas: 400,000
Urlanis: 2,500,000
Encarta: 3,500,000
Rummel: 3,832,000
Nationalist + Communist battle: 1,900,000
Disease: 1,500,000
Japanese puppet Chinese: 432,000
Kinder: 6,400,000
MEDIAN: ca. 2,050,000 (2.0M-2.1M)


Civilian:
Eckhardt: 1,150,000 (1937-41), 850,000 (1941-45)
Kinder: 4,500,000
Wallechinsky: 2-10M (1937-45)
Urlanis: 7,500,000
Ellis: 8,000,000
HarperCollins: up to 10,000,000
Encarta: 10,000,000
Rummel: 15,608,000
Civilian, non-democidal: 3,252,000
Famine: 2,250,000
Democide:
by Japanese: 3,949,000
by Nationalists: 5,907,000
by Communists: 250,000
MEDIAN: ca. 7,750,000 (7.5M-8.0M)
Clodfelter: 71,105 Chinese k. by Japanese bombing
Total:
Messenger: 2.5M
Eckhardt: 4M
Wallechinsky: 4.2-12.2M
Ellis: 9.4M
Urlanis: 10M
Kinder: 10.9M
HarperCollins: < 11M
Encarta: 13.5M
Martin Gilbert A History of the Twentieth Century v.3 (citing Ho Ping-ti): 15-20M
Rummel: 20.44M
MEDIAN: ca. 10,450,000 (10.0M-10.9M)

sunlight #122

India may be a functioning multi-ethnic state. The example of India will not work in other multi-ethnic countries. Almost every multi-ethnic state is unique.

Sri Lanka is basically two states. Burma is a repressive regime that won`t change any time soon. Afghanistan is a fragile state. Iraq is headed for a 3 way split. The future of Nigeria is a question mark.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#115 by aquaris
//...But I have always found that Chineese have a soft corner for Muslims and Islam...//

sure - go ask the xinjiang muslims - who want to ``liberate`` their ``homeland`` from chinese occupation.

One thing commies definitely hate is religion, because that proposes a strong alternative ideology which threatens their own commie ideology. And Islam is the most potent of such ideologies. So rest assured - chinese have NO soft corner for Islam and its followers.

Get wise.

To Romair (America Bred Confused Desi) & other Arabically Bigoted Confused Desis (ABCD),


Instead of calling America great or China great why dont you have a vision of Pakistan great
where human rights are respected, democracy thrives and people`s voices are heard in all the deals (Gwadar, foreign bases) and people are not judged by their ancestory, language (English speaking elite ruling the masses of Punjabi and sindhi speaking), where are not prostituted to foreign Arab and Gora causes.


Have a vision where Paki land is not a hunting ground for well-oiled Arabs and play ground for supe-ly powerful armies. You may have nation built on TNT, but no community because you have cut your deep civilizational roots.


Your tactical moves are all visible ... even to China. In next five years even China will become your enemy. Already you have made American people your enemy.


Your basic problem is you paint every thing in terms of subjugation (not win) and loss. You will never make it a win-win. It might be a wrong interpretation of 7th century book written in a culturally very-very foreign language. Semetics time to time make it win-win but you recently converted tactical fanatics, do not understand simple civilizational truths.