SOURCE
https://www.eurasiareview.com/12112020-in-search-of-the-biden-doctrine-analysis/
Former U.S. Vice President and President-elect Joe Biden addresses the nation. Photo Credit: Screenshot
SOURCE:
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2020/11/mil-201108-globaltimes03.htm?_m=3n%2e002a%2e2919%2epm0ao0egkh%2e2p4s
By
Deng Xiaoci
Source: Global Times
Published: 2020/11/8
China and India have cemented agreements achieved in previous rounds of talks in the latest commander level meeting on Friday, with both sides vowing to ensure their frontline troops "exercise restraint and avoid misunderstanding and miscalculation." Future talks will be arranged soon, indicating the two sides are prepared to prolong the row through the coming winter and even longer, according to an official media release by China's Ministry of National Defense on Sunday.
Both sides agreed to earnestly implement the important consensus reached by the leaders of the two countries, maintain dialogues and communications through military and diplomatic channels, and push for the settlement of other outstanding issues, so as to jointly maintain peace and tranquility in the border areas, said the release.
The wording in the eighth round of talks - "China and India also agreed to have another round of meetings soon" - seems to be keeping the door to a peaceful solution open.
"The agreement of maintaining dialogues and communications itself shows that neither India nor China desires an escalation of the issue, and that both are trying to prevent disagreements from developing into conflicts," Qian Feng, director of the research department at the National Strategy Institute at Tsinghua University, told the Global Times.
The recent enhancement of India-US ties have definitely weighed on the China-India talks, said Qian, adding that the signing of Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement for Geo-Spatial Cooperation during the recent 2+2 India-US ministerial dialogue, which promoted the quasi military alliance between India and the US and the building of QUAD, an informal security grouping of the US, Japan, Australia and India, would surely encourage the Indian side to act tougher during talks.
However, similar to the seventh round of such talks between senior commanders in mid-October, the latest round conducted in early November failed to bring about concrete progress in forming a disengagement plan, which Chinese observers called the "main point" of this series of military channel communications.
Since their sixth round of talks in late September, China and India had announced a slew of decisions including not sending more troops to the frontline, refraining from unilaterally changing the situation on the ground and avoiding any actions that may further complicate matters, Times of India reported.
Chinese analysts pointed out that the outcomes of the seventh and eighth rounds of talks indicated the two sides have entered a stalemate over the disengagement solution, despite other agreements being reached in a generally positive atmosphere, adding that it was the Indian side to blame for this situation.
Indian's reluctance to retreat from the Chinese side of the LAC and to end their aggression near the south bank of the Pangong Tso Lake, which they dared to regard as a "trophy of war" in the border friction, led to the failure in addressing the row, Song Zhongping, a military expert and TV commentator, told the Global Times on Sunday.
Hu Zhiyong, a research fellow at the Institute of International Relations of the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, also expressed disappointment over the latest round of talks, saying that an insincere India had misused the military talks as a setting for shameless bargaining.
According to the Times of India, India maintained that the disengagement process has to start simultaneously at all the flash points, while nearly 50,000 Indian Army troops are currently deployed in a high state of combat readiness in various mountainous locations.
China deployed an equal number of troops, the report claims, citing official sources.
With winter already setting in, the region has now been hit by extreme cold. The China and India border stand-off will become a war of patience and a test of both sides' logistical support capabilities. China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) has an overwhelming superiority over the Indian army if there is ever a winter war, observers said.
Chinese soldiers on border patrol have been given new equipment and suits, including glare-reducing lenses, multifunctional kettles and cold protective suits, to protect them from the extreme weather, the PLA Daily reported.
According to the report, a total of 15 kinds of equipment and suits were supplied to meet the requirements of patrolling in temperatures ranging from - 40 C to -30 C.
And compared with China's indigenous and sufficient supply of winter gear, India has to rely on foreign suppliers, acquiring extreme cold gear sets from the US.
Whether such imported gear would meet the challenge of the harsh cold of the region remains a question, Song noted, suggesting that the PLA is better prepared and more capable when it comes to winter supplies.
The PLA's weapons also beat the Indian army's in terms of extreme cold resistance capability, Song added.
Considering this gap in capabilities, it would be not surprising if the Indian army choose to disengage in the winter time and return when the cold abates, as it is increasingly clear that the border issue with China has become a routine card to play whenever domestic tensions emerge in India, observers said.
As a first step, the armoured vehicles including the tanks, armoured personnel carriers are to be moved back to a significant distance from the LAC by both sides. In the second step to be carried out near the northern bank of the Pangong Tso lake, both sides are to withdraw around 30 per cent of the troops every day for three days. 11:12 PM, 11 NOV No time period has been agreed upon within which to implement the plan; neither is the extent to which it will happen decided between the two sides. 11:12 PM, 11 NOV Both the countries have readied a three-phase plan for disengagement in eastern Ladakh where the two sides have been in a stand-off since May this year. 11:10 PM, 11 NOV India and China may be on the verge of a breakthrough in resolving the over six-month-long tense border standoff in eastern Ladakh with both sides broadly agreeing on disengagement of troops and withdrawal of weaponry from all major friction points in a time-bound manner. 7:31 PM, 11 NOV Senior defence officials of China and the US held telephone talks amid deepening military tensions between the two countries and agreed to properly manage their differences. 7:30 PM, 11 NOV Chinese and the US militaries on Wednesday started an online seminar to share experiences on humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, China's Ministry of National Defence said, amid rising tensions between the two countries over the disputed South China China and Taiwan. 5:19 PM, 11 NOV However, there is no signature or agreement on the plan's implementation as yet, the sources said. No time period has been agreed upon within which to implement the plan; neither is the extent to which it will happen decided between the two sides. 4:20 PM, 11 NOV India and China have readied a three-phase plan for disengagement in eastern Ladakh where the two sides have been in a stand-off since May this year, senior government sources have said. 3:08 PM, 11 NOV India and China have agreed to disengagement from the friction points along the Line of Actual Control in Eastern Ladakh. 2:02 PM, 11 NOV While China has been aggressively pushing for the Indian troops to vacate the multiple strategic heights, India feels that no hasty step should be taken which could result in our troops being left in a disadvantageous position.
Read more at: https://www.oneindia.com/india/india-china-standoff-live-modi-xi-to-meet-first-time-today-since-border-face-off-3141848.html
SOURCE:
https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/comment/reforms-must-go-beyond-pay-pensions-168907
VIDEO: CLICK/GOOGLE TO WATCH VIDEO
[ https://youtu.be/55fNUkk59nQ ]
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
CLICK/GOOGLE URL BELOW TO OPEN
http://welfarenews.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Letter-to-CDS.pdf
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
IN his Mann ki Baat address on the occasion of Kargil Vijay Diwas, Prime Minister Modi addressed the nation with these words, “Whatever we say, our behaviour, our speeches, our aim should be to boost the morale and respect of our soldiers.” These are the words that any soldier would be glad to hear from his highest national leader. He would also wish that the Prime Minister’s words are translated into action by those who implement policy. Unfortunately, what we are witnessing is a steady onslaught on the terms and conditions of service personnel, mostly to dilute provisions that have existed for decades.
Cutting down rations for officers, stopping hotel stay during temporary duty, removing income tax exemption on disability pension, and now the proposal to reduce pension for officers who take premature retirement, are examples of steps that have been taken in the past few years. Some of these were reversed after the government faced sharp criticism, but they created misgivings about the political and military leadership.
It is well understood that military reforms, particularly in times of stressed budgets, are absolutely essential. However, some of the personnel policies being recommended appear ill-considered and could have long-term implications on the character of the military. Without getting into the pros and cons of each proposal, the trends that we are witnessing raise three substantive issues.
The first concerns the responsibility of the military as an organisation towards its members. It would be stating the obvious that the organisation should empower its officers and men and strive to meet their genuine needs. Instead, the approach seemingly being adopted by the military hierarchy is one of collective disempowerment. Income tax relief on disability pension is sought to be stopped for everyone because some ‘unscrupulous personnel’ were misusing disability benefits. Hotel stay for all officers was banned because some of them could indulge in corrupt practices such as ‘exchanging briefcases with contractors’ in the hotel room. A similar logic is being applied in the latest proposal for reducing pension of officers who take premature retirement. Several specialists/super-specialists leave the service to work in other sectors; in order to discourage them, the pensionary benefits of all officers must be cut down.
The military is an integrated body of highly motivated and dedicated men and women who pride themselves on belonging to an honourable profession. Ensuring that there is no misuse of benefits, and that the military values are upheld is primarily the responsibility of the organisation. This is implemented through a system of policies that reward good behaviour, incentives for members, and where required, disciplinary action. Wielding only the blunt instrument that apparently seeks to punish the whole military community for the faults of a few is both an injustice to those who serve with honour and an abdication of organisational responsibility.
The second issue is the impact of the recent proposals on the attitudes of the officer corps. It could well be asked as to why I am specifically talking about the officers and not about all the rank and file who form the larger part of the military. The simple explanation is that officers occupy a special position in the organisation.
In the military system, there is an ‘otherness’ to the officer corps. General John Hackett, in his classic The Profession of Arms, writes, “There is in armies a tendency to set up an officer group with an otherness as a step towards or in some degree a replacement of, the betterness you require.” Officers are commissioned through a document signed by the President who reposes special trust in them. Officers are largely responsible for shaping the military’s ethos and their standards of conduct are pegged at a higher level.
It is the officers who provide the leadership in the military and who are tasked to ensure the care of the men they command. An officer who passes out of the Indian Military Academy takes the Chetwode pledge that he will place the ‘honour, welfare and comfort of his men’ before his ‘own ease, comfort and safety’. This pledge is redeemed daily by thousands of young officers who lead the soldiers from the front and ensure their welfare in the most challenging of conditions.
Some of the recent proposals have caused a sense of disquiet among the officers. I am not going into the merits or demerits of each proposal, but it would be better if policies are implemented after greater deliberation within the officer cadre of the military. Any loss of trust between the junior and senior leadership is a tear that will not be easily repaired.
The third issue is that an obsessive focus on pay and pensions is skewing our thinking on military reform. It is well understood that salaries account for a large section of the total budget, but this is not because the salaries are huge, but because the allocation to defence services is insufficient to support our military ambitions. There is a crying need for reform in the military, but rather than taking the harder step of restructuring to reduce its size, the highest military leadership is looking at options that dilute the terms of service in terms of financial compensation.
The most valued asset of the military is the quality of its human resource capital — the men and women who serve. Thousands of soldiers are currently locked in a standoff with the Chinese army in the freezing conditions of eastern Ladakh. Others are losing their lives battling infiltrators from Pakistan. In times like this, the military leadership needs to display greater sensitivity in pushing policies that could impact the morale of officers and men.
There is an unwritten covenant between the soldier and the state. The soldier pledges to sacrifice his life for the security of the nation, and the state promises to treat the soldier with respect and dignity and provide adequate compensation to him and his family. If this covenant is broken by either side, either the nation will weaken its security, or the military will lose its professionalism. Neither scenario is desirable.
SOURCE:
https://theprint.in/opinion/dont-tinker-with-indian-militarys-way-of-life-to-fix-your-out-of-control-fiscal-deficit/539018/
SOURCE:
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2020-01-23/why-america-must-lead-again
Click/Google to Open the VIDEO [ https://youtu.be/lVwSmc6K5x4 ]
SOURCE:
https://www.quora.com/q/history-of-india?__ni__=0&__nsrc__=4&__snid3__=13657784564&__tiids__=14199905
https://www.quora.com/q/history-of-india/questions
INDIA 326 BC
NAND EMPIRE: What is the story between Chanakya and Dhananda?
BY
Ninad Kshirsagar ( Quora)
Magadha was biggest and strongest Janpada in India which was ruled by Dhanananda of Nanda dynasty. He had the biggest army in entire India. At this time India was facing the threat of Macedonian attack of Alexander. India was a divided house with 16 janapadas.
 |
| Add caption |
Acharya Vishnugupta Chanakya was a renowned acharya of Takshashila (RAWALPINDI now PAKISTAN) University which was the biggest and most reputed university at that time in Entire Bharatvarsha ( present SOUTH ASIA INDIAN SUB CONTINENT). In was located in Takshashila which was capital of Kingdom of Gandhar ruled by king Ambhi. As expected Alexander was standing at gates of India near hindukush. Now the situation was that King of Ambhi of Gandhar and King Puru of Panchnad or modern day Punjab were swore enemies and Ambhi had previously suffered defeat at hands of Puru. So to avenge it Ambhi joined hands with Alexander and opened the gates of Bharat for him by helping him cross hindukush and enter India. ( THIS IS WHAT present day PAKISTAN is doing since 1947 ) He struck a deal that Ambhi will help Alexander with army and after defeat of Puru his kingdom will be given to Ambhi ( Corelate today's PAKISTAN cohabitating with CHINA against INDIA. TWO FRONT WAR ). Alexander and his army entered India. Now their next stop was against Puru( CONSIDER as todays NEW DELHI ). They sent letter to kingdoms to surrender including Puru and Puru the man he was refused and challenged Alexander to meet him in battlefield.
So what happened was that Chanakya knew that India which was divided in small janapada's can't take on the might of Alexander individually. As soons as Chanakya received news of Ambhi joining hands with Alexander Chanakya set out to warn everyone and urge them to unite. Puru was all set for fight anyway. But chanakya still knew that for completely defeating Macedonian force they need support of strong King. Magadha was birth place of Chanakya and Dhanananda was most powerful ruler with a formidable army. Chanakya reached Magadha and wanted to meet and convince dhanananda to march towards north and secure indian borders from Alexander. But Dhanananda was a power hungry , corrupt and incompetent king. Yes he had a mighty force but he was running out and out corrupt administration ( BOTH BJP & prior to BJP CONGRESS since 1947 are playing the game of political chess seething with corruption which is supported & protected by the most corrupt political system in the recorded history of INDIAN SUB CONTINENT )
And rest we know is history how chanakya took young Chandragupta under his fold trained him and Dethrones Dhanananda and instated Chandragupta as Emperor and established the GREAT MAURYAN EMPIRE
