India tells China: Kashmir is to us what Tibet, Taiwan are to you

[gubbi]

Last point first I guess, since it's the one easily answered and the answer is a lot. Do not mistaken an undemocratic with a government not concerned with the people's sentiments.

Even if it matters, how does it translate to a real opposition of the governments policy? AFAIK, China's growth is powered by its government decisions, not by popular "vote" - if I may. People's sentiments dont exactly affect with what the Chinese government sees fit. So if the govt decides that a few concessions can satisfy its outlook, how do the concerns of common people affect the decision making process?

The CCP is perched on a tightrope, in order to quell discontent and stay popular, I bet dollars to peanuts that the CCP is fairly obsessed with public opinion. Think about it, for a government that is so obessed with control of the media, do you think that they will just ignore popular ground swells of opinion that could possible to a source of anger?

Ground swells of popular opinions arent exactly a problem for the Chinese government now, is it? When the govt controls media, it very well controls the information which people get and can very well manipulate or put a spin to any decisions it takes. Then why do you think that the opinions would be any cause for concern to the govt?

 

[Peshwa]

In my opinion, if you say China did not win in Japan alone, I agree, but it also means that the United States, the Soviet Union did not win in Japan alone, this is the victory of the Allies, I agree, but you can not say that China has not made victory for Japan, if China did not win, the United States did not win, who win?

Huzihaidao....

The Chinese were no doubt instrumental in defeat of the Japanese. I have nowhere slighted the contribution of the Chinese resistance. But I am of the opinion that the main blow to imperial Japan (attributing their defeat) was delivered by the US and not China.

Defeat of Japan and ending the war (at least in Asia), I credit to the US actions. But as Allies, Russia, UK and China get credit as well.

Nevertheless, as suggested, lets gather and debate about these points on a new thread solely for the Sino-Japanese war.

 

[huzihaidao12]

Huzihaidao....

The Chinese were no doubt instrumental in defeat of the Japanese. I have nowhere slighted the contribution of the Chinese resistance. But I am of the opinion that the main blow to imperial Japan (attributing their defeat) was delivered by the US and not China.

Defeat of Japan and ending the war (at least in Asia), I credit to the US actions. But as Allies, Russia, UK and China get credit as well.

Nevertheless, as suggested, lets gather and debate about these points on a new thread solely for the Sino-Japanese war.

Can only say that China undertakes most of the Japanese army, in full-time, if not the battlefield of China, Japan will get the resources what he wants, will not have any obstruction in Southeast Asia, it will have a large number of Japanese troops in front of U.S. troops, In this situation, if the United States can be victorious, at least he is difficult to say.

 

[CardSharp]

Even if it matters, how does it translate to a real opposition of the governments policy? AFAIK, China's growth is powered by its government decisions, not by popular "vote" - if I may. People's sentiments dont exactly affect with what the Chinese government sees fit. So if the govt decides that a few concessions can satisfy its outlook, how do the concerns of common people affect the decision making process?

Ground swells of popular opinions arent exactly a problem for the Chinese government now, is it? When the govt controls media, it very well controls the information which people get and can very well manipulate or put a spin to any decisions it takes. Then why do you think that the opinions would be any cause for concern to the govt?

I'm just going to leave this lest we fall into the same old mode of arguing.

 

[huzihaidao12]

In fact, the Japanese army in 1945 had been suppressed by PLA. Even without the U.S., China to solve it.

 

[CardSharp]

In fact, the Japanese army in 1945 had been suppressed by PLA. Even without the U.S., China to solve it.

Another point to look at is the Chinese civil war that was happening side by side with the Sino-Japanese war. Whatever success the Japanese had in China during the war was in no small part due to the KMT, the then ruling government's was unwilling to fight the Japanese.

Chiang Kai-shek was quoted: "the Japanese are a disease of the skin, the Communists are a disease of the heart".

After the battle of Midway, Chiang knew the Japanese were done and horded his resources and men for the civil war he knew he was going to have to fight after the Japanese. He only dribbled enough Chinese units into the fight to appease the United States and keep the supplies and money coming, but really by then he made up his mind that he was going to wait the Japanese out.

It is doubtful that Japanese could have had so many successes against a united and well led China.

 

[CardSharp]

Also ironically, this plan backfired on Chiang. While his troops were seen to have stood aside and watched the massacring of the Chinese people, the communists and the PLA actively enaged in a guerrilla war against the Japanese, thus gaining much popular support after the war.

 

[gubbi]

I'm just going to leave this lest we fall into the same old mode of arguing.

You mistake me. I am not getting into an argument, I am genuinely interested how the Chinese govt functions.

 

[CardSharp]

You mistake me. I am not getting into an argument, I am genuinely interested how the Chinese govt functions.

Well first off you should look at it from a party opposition POV. More later.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

You mistake me. I am not getting into an argument, I am genuinely interested how the Chinese govt functions.

OK I'll answer it.

Public opinion is very important to the CPC. Which is why "controlling inflation" has been such a big deal recently in China, and why the Chinese government arguably overreacted to the credit crunch by pumping in more money than was necessary.

According to the international polls (Pew Global Research Center, etc), the Chinese government has the highest level of support out of all governments in the world. Do you think that is an accident? Certainly not.

Chinese satisfied with government - Washington Times

Below is one example of how public opinion can quickly change public policy.

Green Dam Youth Escort - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also, the old Chinese concept referred to as the "Mandate of Heaven", gives authority to rulers, only if they are just rulers. If a ruler is considered to be unjust by the people, then they lose the moral authority to rule.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

It is simply not practical to rule a country the size of China unless you have support from the people.

The Pew Global Research poll that I linked in my previous post, shows 86% of Chinese trust the government, far ahead of the second place runner up Australia which scored only 60%.

The 2010 Edelman Trust Barometer shows that 88% of Chinese trust the government. There is a thread on this running in the China defence section.

NOW imagine... the numbers were reversed, and close to ninety percent of the people were unhappy with the government. There is no way they could survive, not even with a battalion of tanks on every street corner.

 

[Peshwa]

Can only say that China undertakes most of the Japanese army, in full-time, if not the battlefield of China, Japan will get the resources what he wants, will not have any obstruction in Southeast Asia, it will have a large number of Japanese troops in front of U.S. troops, In this situation, if the United States can be victorious, at least he is difficult to say.

Huzihaido....I didnt quite grasp what you meant to say here.

Did you mean that China was defending Indo-China and Chinese mainland simultaneously? And had China not done this, Japan would have had access to the resources it needed to keep the Americans at bay? This would have made things hard for Americans?

 

[ksgokul]

Unfortunately I think it doesn't matter who is in charge, the window on the Chinese side is closing, not least because the new more politically conscious middle class is unlikely to allow the government to give away land, they see as Chinese land. The major concessions made to the other 9 bordering countries during the early days of the Republic were possible because the Chinese people were not as politically minded (the way we think about politics).

Sir,
Somehow i feel that having a more democratic voice in China is a plus for India. While you may be true, politically minded middle class may not like to give away the lands under the control of China, they wouldn't worry about something that is not under their control right now. At least it has happened in India. Unless people in China are so attached to AP like Taiwan.
People won't like a government going on war mode too. Bad thing would be to have a bad dictator at the helm of offers. Chinese people have a lot at stake for the world remaining peaceful and so are indians

Thanks.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Sir,
Somehow i feel that having a more democratic voice in China is a plus for India. While you may be true, politically minded middle class may not like to give away the lands under the control of China, they wouldn't worry about something that is not under their control right now. At least it has happened in India. Unless people in China are so attached to AP like Taiwan.
People won't like a government going on war mode too. Bad thing would be to have a bad dictator at the helm of offers. Chinese people have a lot at stake for the world remaining peaceful and so are indians

Thanks.

I disagree actually.

I think a democratic China would be MORE nationalist than it is now.

The CPC often attempts to reduce nationalist sentiment, which it sees as something that could cause political instability.

At best, the Chinese position regarding India would be exactly the same as it is now. What do you think the average Chinese person would say about the fact that India has been hosting our largest separatist group (the Tibetan government "in exile") for over 50 years?

 

[CardSharp]

Sir,
Somehow i feel that having a more democratic voice in China is a plus for India. While you may be true, politically minded middle class may not like to give away the lands under the control of China, they wouldn't worry about something that is not under their control right now. At least it has happened in India. Unless people in China are so attached to AP like Taiwan.
People won't like a government going on war mode too. Bad thing would be to have a bad dictator at the helm of offers. Chinese people have a lot at stake for the world remaining peaceful and so are indians

Thanks.

I agree to a point but you may have a distorted picture of a democratic China would look like. I would venture to say a democratic China in the future would be just as nationalistic and I'm sure many other Chinese here would agree. The PRC more or less tries to sit on nationalism and play down events that might cause a runaway nationalistic tendency. A democratic China full of demagogues and fire-breathers will attempt no such thing. Rather than modulating nationalism they like hack politicians everywhere will likely exploit it.

No people are immune to this, this includes the Chinese.

Yours is an interest view because it really reflects something many westerners especially Americans hold dear. ie Democracy is what makes us great, so everyone else must want what we have. and the corollary if people adopted democracy they would think more like us and hold the same values. This I don't think is really true.

To give you an example, much of the US planning in the Iraq war hinged on Americans being welcomes as liberators and that if Americans installed a democracy, Iraqis would abandon their values to embrace Americans one. Most would probably agree this was a mistaken approach.