[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.

[maxglute]

No I'm saying nations party to SCS maritime drama always protest when PRC regularly asserts their territory, just like they do to each other, because that's customary geopolitical response. And it's 5, not a dozen, like you don't need to make up numbers, it's literally a handful.

With respect to land border, yes India is infact the sole loner that needs to educate itself. 12/14 other PRC land borders had no problem settling, again most with MORE PRC concessions. 1/14 Bhutan wants to settle but can't because India. That leaves only India who has this infantile notion that there is some fantasy world where borders can be settled in 100/0 Indian favour which is frankly medically retarded expectation only a child can have. Any proper history education will teach India only way to get 100/0 is loser in war and frequently not even then. So yes education away from that level of delusional magical thinking is apt.

SCS disputees also you know dispute with each other, everyone protests each other and with except of PH gets along fine with PRC. Also PRC position on SCS is legal under UNCLOS. Or rather not illegal. Or more technically correct, can't even be illegal. TLDR useful idiots believe PCA ruling is actual UNCLOS ruling when it's manifestly not (it's basically mock UN US+PH did on PCA stationary with anti PRC cosplayers). UN/ITLOS/ICJ/UNCLOS has no formal position on PCA ruling MEANING ITS NOT INTERNATIONAL LAW despite the heavy propaganda. Since PRC not party to optional arbitutaion clause, i.e. again no ratify no care, besides which UNCLOS cannot determine sovereingty claims so the idea PRC breaks UNCLOS is so retarded it's not even wrong since there is literally no mechanism in UNCLOS to rule PRC claims as illegal... hence PRC is in fact in compliance with her UNCLOS accession obligations.

PS: 1. No again this is history 101, PRC has always had 9dash, which it treats as domestic delimitations, it used to be 11 dash under ROC, i.e. it has always been part of past claims, for decades since post war. CHINESE (PRC/ROC) CLAIMS HAS OFFICIALLY ALWAYS COVERED SCS, PRC formally inherited claims from ROC when UN recognition switched and ROC claims proceeded that. I said India is the only LAND BORDER disputee, i.e. bilateral disputee, 1vs1 which should on paper be much simple negotiation, hence PRC able to ratify 12/14 land border in rapid negotiations. But somehow not Indian, and by extension Bhutan. Because clearly it's the other 12-13/14 who are outliers /s. SCS is a 5 party shitshow and much harder to resolve and everyone objects to eachothers overlapping claims, even then PRC ceding Tonkin to Vietnam makes PRC one of the better actors. So if you want to do the numberes, then 12/14+5, i.e. 12/19 PRC land+maritime disputees are solved, aka plurality. The 5/5 maritime cannot be solved bilaterally and will remain shitshow. The on paper low hanging fruit 2/14 land border is held up by India.

2. PRC is not ignoring past treaties, it's simply not fucking subject to treaties it doesn't sign. The very strange position is Indians believing a treaty between India and UK over Tibet that ROC EXPLICLITLY REPUDIATED AT TIME OF NOT SIGNING, I.E. ROC -> PRC DOES NOT APPROVE OF THIS TREATY AND EXPLICITY NOTIFIED PARTIES AT THE TIME, is somehow a valid treaty. Absolute toddler logic.

[lenkite]

Unfortunately, our positions differ based on international boundaries ratified before independence. (Also, laughable that PRC sticks to ROC claims on one-hand, while it also simultaneously denies them on the other hand - aka Taiwan)

Let me address the major point that you bring up. PRC lays claim to 125,000 square KM - most of which is currently Indian territory. That is nearly ~8-10x of any other nation that China settled with - well, excluding ROC (Taiwan) - which China has also not "settled" with. Today, dozens of modern nations fit into 125,000 square KM of territory.

India does not need to "educate itself" - it has had over 20 rounds of talks with China recently and China has utterly not budged from claiming the FULL state (along with some adjacent territory too). It is not India, but China that is not willing to concede. If the dispute was merely ~10k sq KM, it would have already been solved. There are some very good reasons behind China's intractable position. This is extraordinarily resource rich territory that is utterly untapped by India due to constitutional protections offered to this state and its indigenous tribals. China, obviously, has no such protective obligations.

But for India, this state is populated by voters, native elected representatives and constitutionally protected indigenous tribes. There is utterly no way voters are going to even acknowledge being associated with China in any way, with utterly zero Chinese ethnicity present. Full ~120k sq km of a bio-diverse, resource-rich and populated-by-voters living in a democratic state for over 75 years, being utterly claimed by China is ridiculous and does not lend itself to any possible "settlement".

[maxglute]

E: last reply

TW is not a territory dispute, it's a unsolved civil war, i.e. PRC is not intending to split territory with TW, like other disputes, TW is winner takes all.

What PRC claims from India is not what PRC actually wants. PRCs offered package swap deal with India for decades (and imo continues to be) with India was "east for west". PRC gets 40k sqkm Aksai China claims it currently defacto controls, basically empty land where no one lives. India gets Arunachal Pradesh, i.e. what India defacto controls, the state. AKA just formalize border at where both sides controls, there's no actual PRC interest in AP the state and the people, because is as you recognized ridiculous.

AP just barginning chip for "east for west" swap, same with PRC claims on Tawang that India + western media likes to play up as some Dalai + Tawang super combo to threaten PRC Tibet succession crisis. Reality is Tibet is no longer a restive region, it's been thoroughly securitized and PRC can print their own dalai lama and rule Tibetians as they see fit. It's just another pressure point because India taking 20 rounds of talks and 40+ years have gotten nowhere leaves no option but accept the status quo - which PRC doesn't want, they want to ratify borders - hence pile on pressure via salami slicing for India to accept package deal.

Ultimately I think PRC fine with "east for west". All China wants is their bit of tundra for G219 highway to connect Xinjiang and Tibet. They don't want some full Indian state and the people and the resources, because that's also logistically ridiculous. PRC is not going to go over the Tibetan plateau to mine untapped resources in AP when they have entire Tibetan plateau to mine.

TLDR Indian media keeps insinuating PRC wants all of AP when PRC doesn't, it just wants the border formalized at current occupation/administered areas (i.e. no mass people resettlement needed). Just ratify borders and stop encouraging tibetan exile shenanigans, same way India doesn't like Canada entertaining Khalistanis. no need to go back to pre dalai lama asylum hindi chini bhai bhai, but also no paitence to wait another 20/50/forever years.