[lenkite]

The basic problem is Salami Slicing is very difficult to protect against. And China is an expert at this and building infrastructure after point-by-point occupation which then defacto becomes part of their map. India should also do the same thing in return - but it requires way too much long term focus and investment for a democratic government.

[maxglute]

The basic problem is PRC resolved 12/14 land borders (majority with concessions) and flipping Bhutan would make india the last holdout and the optics of that doesn't work in Indian favour. But Bhutan can't settle bilaterally since they are legally obligated to consider Indian security interests and being landlocked country with India as only feasible access abroad constrains Bhutan from true sovereign decision making. As in they could but they'd be stupid to piss off india especially when disputes invovle trijunction/chicken neck/strategic land. TBH PRC fine with ceding Doklam to Bhutan now (it's not that strategic anymore with how much PRC MIC has advanced), but it's far more useful as barginning chip to try to pressure India to settle broader border disputes with PRC, which India (at least populist Modi) can't because ceding territory is political suicide in democracy even if India gets >50%. Still the pressure point going to keep get pressed, salami going to keep getting sliced until India or Bhutan decides the opportunity costs of not security drama is worth settling. This isn't meant to malign/attribute blame to India (who just has a poor record settling borders, i.e. Bangladesh took 40 years, most of PRCs took 5-10), merely pointing out structurally/politically, it's much more difficult for India to settle border disputes with any loss via dialogue, after 50 years of getting nowhere, for PRC the only strategy left is to stir the pot.

[lenkite]

> The basic problem is PRC resolved 12/14 land borders ...Still the pressure point going to keep get pressed, salami going to keep getting sliced until India or Bhutan decides the opportunity costs of not security drama is worth settling.

Yeah, this 12/14 number you picked out of the air will only work until China decides it is 12/30 next year and 12/50 the next decade. Kindly remember that China has expanded its international map. They have now formally put the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh as part of Chinese territory since 2023. A state which has a duly ELECTED native chief minister and also native representatives. A state that has China has decided to claim due to its natural resources and extensive biodiversity - which India, by constitutional law, is not permitted to exploit to protect natives and indigenous tribal communities. NONE of whom have any Chinese traditions. You should come to the state and check for yourself.

Citizens of the state with transit flights through China get harassed and bullied by Chinese officialdom, even after getting "no-objection" by the Chinese embassy at nation of departure.

How can you settle borders when one nation keeps expanding their formal map ?

[maxglute]

https://i.imgur.com/207ewHW.png

https://i.imgur.com/K9JRarz.png

12/14 PRC ratified landborder is like... the easiest thing to cross reference since they're internationally ratified treatsies and you know... that 14 land border hasn't change post war, like are 16/36 new countries just going to pop out of existence? Is India going to fragment to create all those new countries for PRC to claim?

Kindly remember PRC map has remained exactly what is since inherited from ROC, i.e. there has been zero new claims except what was under dispute for the past 70 years. Hell, AP claim dates back to 1914 not 2023, it's always been in PRC maps. This is 101 history / geopoltics. This here ahistoric understanding is exactly why India has so much problems settling borders with her neighbours vs PRC resolving 12/14th, making PRC the most successfull and benevolent (i.e. almost all with >50% concessions) in human history.

So can you settle borders with such a magnamous power? Hint 12/14 countries did, the 13th Bhutan wants to, India is the holdout. So the answer is, very easily, unless your populous is terminally ignorant of history and thinks being the 1/14h holdout isn't a sign that maybe PRC isn't the problem. Note how in table PRC settled most of her disputes in <10 years, India took ~40 with Bangladesh, at some point timepass mentality stops being excuse. And again it's not PRC whose not willing to settle, and provide MORE concessions, it's India who thinks it should get 100%, which is frankly not a serious position.

[lenkite]

https://img2.chinadaily.com.cn/images/202308/28/64ec91c2a310...

https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2023/08/30/chinas-updated-map-and...

https://www.gmfus.org/news/unpacking-chinas-new-standard-map

This is the easiest thing to cross-reference regarding expansion of their national map. Why should we "magnanimously" decide to give away land that India actually holds according to the 1914 treaty ? Why should we give away our eastern states ? None of them have Chinese ethnicity. They all have native elected representatives. Again - come and do a tour of Eastern Indian states such as Arunachal Pradesh - they don't speak Chinese, they have indigenous native tribes. Calling the area "South Tibet" is an absolute joke.

We will stick to the 1914 Treaty. We will not accept China's formal territorial expansion in 2023. Neither do other states like Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia (nearly a dozen nations) that have completely rejected the same.

PS: As a clear contradiction - even the Russian negotiations never got properly settled in your 12/14. China claimed the whole Bolshoy Ussuriysky island yet again. So even stuff that is settled needs to get re-settled once China expands its ambitions. What is the point ?

[maxglute]

Again... what expansion? These 2023 map did not introduce ANY new claims. Old PRC maps has always claimed AP and AC, and if anything 9dash is down grade from 10/11dash from decades ago (when PRC ceded Tonkin to North Vietnam, because again PRC magnanamous). There is quite literally nothing new in this map except the tizzy it caused because PRC released it before ASEAN and G20 summit and parties have to protest or else it's tacit acceptance. Generic geopolitical messaging. Like nothing in it was new except Indian media trying to pretend they're new claims to useful idiot audiences who don't know 101 history.

1914 treaty doesn't apply to PRC because you know... they didn't ratify Simla and explicitly repudiated it. A country is not bound to a treaty it didn't sign. India's position of what they ratify between UK and somehow that applies to ROC/PRC/China which isn't party to it and explictly does not endorse is is frankly another unserious position. Like this is a territory dispute, it's not about the fucking people. People can be moved, land can't. You can squeeze all 1.4B people in there and say look how Indian it is and it wouldn't matter because the dispute is over land.

E: Bolshoy, it's called more retarded geopolitical drama, propaganda by western sources trying to drive wedge between PRC/RU for obvious reasons (i.e. you linking to lol Bonnie Glaser of ex CSIS China Power doing atlantacism propaganda at German Martial Fund). RU and PRC affirmed both sides adhere to common position on resolved border issue, and in 2024 PRC/RU did joint development on the island... you know because it was never an issue to begin with. The point is once India stops FUDDING around fake news and learn some history/media literacy 101, maybe there can be productive border ratification, again like 12/14 other countries instead of living under the delusion that there's a scenario where India gets 100 and PRC gets 0 because the British OKayed it. Again utterly unserious, borderline infantile position to think 100/0 split is feasible.

[lenkite]

> The point is once India stops FUDDING around and learn some history/media literacy 101, maybe there can be productive border ratification, again like 12/14 other countries instead of living under the delusion...

Lol, what ? Are you saying that all the dozen nations are now happy with the post-2023 Chinese map and India is the sole loner and must educate itself ? Is it a delusion that Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, etc object to ~90% of the South China Sea now claimed, including EEZs up to 200 nautical miles away which also breaks UNCLOS - which China ratified.

PS: Even if we stick to your very strange position of ignoring international boundaries of past treaties because of current government objections, the China map did expand outside of "past claims" - it officially now covers the South China Sea as part of China's sovereign territory. India is not the only objector - as you falsely state.