The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPeter Lee Archive
The World’s Most Dangerous Letters Are Not SCS…They’re CPEC
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

That’s the theme of my most recent piece at Asia Times. Read it here.

The U.S. sailor suit brigade is obsessed with playing profitable pattycake with the PLAN in the South China Sea.

But a more significant and dangerous confrontation is brewing over the China Pakistan Economic Corridor.

India doesn’t like the CPEC, and China hawks in India are tempted to use it as an opportunity for mischief. And if US hawks are given greater rein in a Clinton presidency…

Here’s my takeaway at Asia Times:

Don’t make the mistake of regarding the CPEC as another South China Sea, an opportunity for a budget-fattening play date for the US and PRC and other regional militaries, one carefully constrained and choreographed between several high-capacity partners within a relatively stable political and security matrix…

… think of Pakistan as another Syria, a nation with its national polity sliding into dysfunction and insurrection, immersed in a hostile environment of strategic enemies and failing states, a potential regional black hole of violence and chaos …

… except it has 180 million people, has nuclear weapons, and shares borders with two anxious world powers.

If India decides it wants to light the fuse over the CPEC, there’s enough tinder to burn up a lot of South Asia, starting with Balochistan down by Gwadar but extending all the way up to Kashmir/Gilgit Baltistan up by the PRC border. And beyond that, of course, is Xinjiang and the Uyghur issue.

And beyond that, of course there’s this map that makes the rounds in the anti-Han nationalist crowd:


My interest in the CPEC question was focused by a series of tweets I’ve been getting from, as far as I can tell, an Indian nationalist with anger management (and poo obsession) issues who has decided to tag me on his anti-China tweets. A selection:

FORGET CPEC sh*tty hans @chinahand

Sh*tbred han dog @chinahand dream on

@chinahand Tibet/Uyghur/Mongol/Kashmi/Baloc ALL HATE fugly hans

Hey sh*t-born shit-sucking han mofo @chinahand F*CK OFF from Kashmir n Balochistan or get slaughtered a la SIKKIM67

Chinese Army- You dont get out of Occupied-Balochistan n pok NOW you will be TAKEN BACK IN PIECES #FreeBalochistan#FreeUyghurs #FreeMongols

“My poster reads: Pakistan, China: Hands off Balochistan” Sir I had sent this to a few sh*tborn hans like @chinahand

#FreeBalochistan #FreeTibet #FreeUyghuristan #FreeInnerMongolia shd be our war-cry. kick out chinese cos

Hmm. Interesting to me is that he gets retweets from Indian nationalists, and Baloch and Tibetan independence supporters. So I can thank my twitter acquaintance for directing my attention to the burbling issue of separatist mischief in the Indian geo-political tool kit.

The CPEC offers the possibility of giving new life to the old interest in weakening the PRC through encouragement of separatist movements both inside and outside the borders of the PRC.

The Indian government, especially its PRC-despising hawks in the defense/security establishment, sees the strategic potential of stirring the Central and South Asian resentments against China and Pakistan, as readers will see from the Asia Times piece.

Strategists in the U.S. are just starting to nibble at the possibilities of messing with the CPEC, possibly because of the US Navy-focused obsession with maritime issues which extends even to Ash Carter’s desperate pandering to India on Navy preoccupations like joint patrols, aircraft carrier design, and logistics cooperation.

If the US Navy can figure out a way to get an aircraft carrier into the Himalayas, maybe our think tanks will get serious about cooking up something really hot for the PRC along the CPEC route.

Balochistan is the most obvious focus of agitation against the CPEC, thanks to its nascent and brutally suppressed independence movement. I’m hardpressed to come up with a suitable analogy for what the Pakistan military and ISI are apparently doing down there. As far as I can tell, it’s nastier than Gaza, Kashmir, Tibet, or Xinjiang, though I’m sure those places are bad enough. Closest I can think of is the death squad campaigns carried out in Colombia.

Balochistan-Iran-Pakistan Michael Kaplan first hinted at the potential for d*cking with China at Gwadar via the Baloch in 2009 (he didn’t come up with it out of thin air, though; Baloch ethnicity straddles the Pakistan-Iran border and Baloch insurgents were long exploited by the US and Gulf States an tool for harassing Iran) and I’m sure US think tanks are ramping up their Balochistan desks right now.

But I think the true great power game will play out in the north, on the “Kashmir” issue, where the PRC, India, and Pakistan have competing territorial claims. Low intensity disputes involving the underpopulated and barren regions of Aksai Chin, Gilgit Baltistan, “Azad Kashmir”, “China Occupied Kashmir”, “India Occupied Kashmir”, “Pakistan Occupied Kashmir” or Jammu and Kashmir, depending on the reader’s prefererence will probably get subsumed into the question of the CPEC and have the potential to become nationalist/security/strategic/China containment global hot buttons.

Because of issues of space and reader patience, I did not do a deep dive into the Kashmir issue at Asia Times.

But at China Matters, considerations of space, time, and tedium impose no limits.

The CPEC, as it exits Pakistan and before it enters the Xinjiang Autonomous Region passes through some disputed territory. I suppose it is not too surprising that it is difficult to find one map that shows the competing territorial claims and also shows the CPEC route.

This one’s OK, though the CPEC route is pure fantasy.


The wild card is “Gilgit-Baltistan”.

Gilgit-Baltistan originally belonged to the princely state of Kashmir. Kashmir, with its mixed population of Muslims and Hindus, became caught up in the Pakistan-India conflict at Partition in 1947. In an atmosphere of ethnic violence and provocation, Pakistan tried to seize Kashmir and the Maharajah opted for accession to India as a defensive move (he originally wanted independence). In the subsequent conflict between India and Pakistan, Pakistan occupied a western slice of Kashmir proper (“Azad Jammu & Kashmir” on the map above) and also the remote “northern areas” of the princely state, now called Gilgit-Baltistan.

Pakistan attempted to decouple the northern areas from the Kashmir dispute by incorporating them as “Gilgit Baltistan”, and there’s a genuine demographic/ethnic validity to the approach. Gilgit-Baltistan is a fascinating mélange of ethnicities and is majority Shia Muslim; “Azad Kashmir”, Pakistan’s name for the part of Kashmir it occupies that isn’t “Gilgit Baltistan” is majority Sunni, as is the balance of Kashmir under Indian control.

And the CPEC makes its way through Pakistan to the Khunjerab Pass and the PRC by transiting “Gilgit Baltistan” (purple area) and avoiding “Azad Kashmir” (light blue stuff).


Thanks to predictably clumsy political moves by the Pakistan government, including encouragement of Sunni immigration, Gilgit Baltistan also has an independence movement. However, despite its apparently imposing bulk, Gilgit Baltistan, roughly the size of the state of Maine, is home to only around 2 million people fragmented in ethnicities distinct to individual Himalayan valleys. Balochistan, on the other hand, has 14 million people and a burgeoning self-identity as one of the great and greatly aggrieved stateless peoples of the world. Therefore, I expect that the local security issues surrounding the northern end of the route are seen as relatively manageable.

Diplomacy is another matter. India rejects the “Gilgit Baltistan” vs. “Azad Kashmir” dichotomy and characterizes them as a unity, “Pakistan occupied Kashmir”.

And that puts the CPEC in disputed territory. And if India decides it needs to do something about that, anything is possible.

I don’t take PRC-India border disputes—which encompass Arunachal Pradesh (held by India, claimed by PRC) in the east, Aksai Chin (claimed by India, occupied by PRC) abutting Kashmir in the west, and even a small slice of Kashmir that Pakistan, in India’s opinion, improperly ceded to the PRC in 1963–too seriously as security and economic matters. Both sides have fortified the areas they actually control, the areas in question are sparsely populated and remote, and an offsetting recognition of each others’ occupied areas as sovereign territories has been on the table for literally half a century.

Kashmir disputes are another matter. The traditional calculus has been “India keeps a lid on Tibetan anti-PRC activities, PRC does not mess with Kashmir”.

By its lights, the PRC perhaps believes it is sidestepping the Kashmir issue by running the CPEC through “Gilgit Baltistan”. And maybe there’s a grand bargain at work, like a deal to swap PRC recognition of Indian sovereignty over Tawang (a major monastery town and stronghold of support for the Dalai Lama that is the main sticking point in the Arunachal Pradesh side of the equation) for acquiescence to CPEC passage through northern Pakistan. And the PRC can make the argument that a more prosperous and more stable Pakistan integrated into Central Asia is a better neighbor for India than the current model, and tolerating CPEC passage through the disputed area is a small price to pay.

But China hawks in India are a pretty implacable lot and there is certain support for the idea that the CPEC is a game-changing hostile act against India. As a piece by Harsh V. Pant of King’s College, London, put it: The China-Pakistan axis gains momentum and could pull India into a war on two fronts.

There is agitation to put the Kashmir issue on the front burner, as in Kashmiri activists seek India’s support to ‘save’ PoK from China’s increasing strength on the populist agitation side, to strategic calls to switch India’s posture from de facto acquiescence to the Kashmir status quo to a policy of pursuing recovery of all of Kashmir to block the growth of PRC presence “even if it takes several decades”.

And, naturally, on the covert side there is support for the idea to declare open season against the CPEC and Pakistan in Balochistan. The Pakistan papers are already filled with accusations that India’s RAW is trying to disrupt the CPEC and even partition and destroy Pakistan through support of Baloch militants, both directly and through its allies in the Afghanistan secret service.

And there’s more, as we say. The Indian government has indicated it needs to have the separatist/democracy movement card ready to play within China.

The Indian government recently allowed a conference to be held at Dharamsala on democratization of the PRC that hosted a healthy number of “anti-China” activists.

The conference was organized by Initiatives for China, an organization headed by democracy activist Yang Jianli. Participants included human rights lawyer Teng Biao, Hong Kong Indigenous’s Edward Leung, Tibet independence activist TenzinTsundue, Miss Canada (and Fa Lun Gung organ-harvesting activist) Anastasia Lin, and underground church pastor and human rights activist Hu Shigen. Add Marion Smith, Director of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation. Judging by a Mongolian flag that showed up in a photo, advocates of independence for Inner Mongolia were there too.

And Uyghurs as well. The Indian government apparently backed down under PRC pressure and refused visas to the invitees from the World Uyghur Congress but one Uyghur representative made it, Ilshat Hassan, head of the Uyghur American Association.

He told Devirupa Mitra:

His “big takeaway” was that the Uighur exile community needed to do more networking in India. “I was told how to approach the media, think tanks here in India. … I am confident that I will be back.”

And India should be a supporter of the Uighur cause, he felt, if only for strategic reasons. “By raising support, helping us, the Indian government can have leverage (with China),” Hassan asserted.

The PRC was also undoubtedly unhappy to learn that the conference was also attended by Katrina Lantos Swett, daughter of the late human rights champion Senator Tom Lantos and, in her own right one of the nine commissioners of the entirely US federal government funded United States Commission on International Religious Freedom.

Coverage for this event, which culminated in an audience with the Dalai Lama, was remarkably muted. The only journalist that seems to have covered the conference was Ursula Gauthier, recently expelled from the PRC for her Xinjiang writing. And all she’s done so far is post a few pictures on her Twitter feed. Whassup, Ursula! Did the Indian government pass the word it didn’t want this event to gain too high and PRC-antagonistic profile, so attendees and journos kept it zipped? Self-censorship??

Nevertheless, anti-CCP dissidents harbor hopes that the Indian government is ready to play the democracy/national determination/subversion/insurgent card, and Indian natsec types are happy to encourage them.

Discussing the invites to Uyghur activists, ex-National Security Advisor, Shivshankar Menon remarked:

“I see it as necessary, possibly useful, but also setting us on a new course with China…We must play with the levers and cards we are dealt by fate and the Chinese.”

In other words, there’s a narrative that India has to move beyond its traditional preoccupation with just sticking it to Pakistan and keeping hands off the PRC, to a new paradigm of sticking it to the PRC to resist an unacceptable encroachment of PRC strategic influence into South Asia through the CPEC, and through its other maritime and infrastructure gambits.

In the case of CPEC, maybe helping out the liberation movement in Balochistan, but also yielding to the temptation to add a Xinjiang/Uyghur element, perhaps via Afghanistan, to the proceedings.

And for its part, the PRC is apparently keeping its “unleash hell in India via Pakistan-backed Kashmir jihadis” option open.

At the beginning of April, the PRC delegation at the UN blocked the designation of Masood Azhar as a terrorist. Azhar and his group, Jaish-e-Mohammed or JeM, have vowed the destruction of India as the cornerstone of their campaign of jihad to “liberate” Kashmir. Indian intelligence has implicated his group in the notorious Mumbai massacre of 2008 and a January 2016 attack on an Indian air force base at Pathankot. It is widely assumed that Azhar is sponsored/protected by the Pakistan military as an anti-Indian asset.

The case against Azhar appears to be pretty much a slam-dunk but the PRC has blocked the designation multiple times at Pakistan’s behest. Reading the tea leaves, in April the Indian government wanted to gain the designation as a statement that the PRC was ready to kick Pakistan to the curb for the sake of closer ties to India, but apparently PRC wasn’t ready for that and is keeping the Azhar card in its pocket for a more appropriate moment.

Indian nationalist dismay at the Indian government’s decision to revoke the visa for Uyghur World Congress leader Dolkun Isa to the Dharmasala conference seems to be founded in the belief that the visa was originally issued as retaliation for the PRC move at the UN, and the Indian government then backed down.

I hope the PRC, India, and Pakistan can work out a modus vivendi without reaching into the separatist toolkit.

Activists, separatists, and insurgents are a dangerous form of strategic leverage. They don’t take direction, they tend toward extremism, and giving them support, money, havens, and in the worst case arms can lead to unexpected knock-on effects. The most famous example is Germany sending Lenin to Russia during World War I and inadvertently midwifing the birth of the Soviet Union.

But there are examples closer to home, like India’s disastrous support for Tamil separatists in Sri Lanka that led to a war of annihilation inside Sri Lanka and blowback in the form of the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi by the Tamil Tigers after he tried to wind down support for the insurgency.

And next door there is the endlessly rolling horror of the Pakistan/Taliban nexus in Afghanistan and western Pakistan.

And in terms of body counts from runaway intervention, look at Democratic Republic of Congo.

And Syria, the example I use in the lead.

The mantra of security strategists is This Time It’s Different. We’ll keep the lid on this thing.

But trust me. It’s Never Different.

And, given the reckless bareknuckle tactics of the ISI in Pakistan and RAW in India and their independence from civilian control, it’s more likely to turn out as It’s the Same as Last Time Only Worse.

As I say in my Asia Times piece, “Reconciling India to the CPEC must rank as one of the more sensitive and difficult issues in world diplomacy.”

This is pretty tricky terrain. The PRC, which I would characterize as a powerful, high-functioning state that’s done a pretty good job looking after itself in a hostile neighborhood for the last few decades, has the ability to manage a tense “frenemy” relationship with India. But if the onus is on Pakistan to serve as the PRC’s partner, ally, and instrument along the CPEC route…

As I wrote over at Asia Times:

And to deal with these myriad challenges, the PRC has to lean on Pakistan. As the dismal precedent of the US experience illustrates, bad things happen when a great power relies on the Pakistan military/ISI for restrained, intelligent, responsible, and effective execution of a complicated security and political program.

As I see it, the CPEC has only a narrow, winding path to success. If it works, it will be a miracle of disciplined diplomacy overcoming massive institutional, popular, and external resistance.

There are a thousand roads to failure, failure that might come by design, or by accident as uncontrollable forces are released.

I wonder if even trying is worth the risk.

(Republished from China Matters by permission of author or representative)
Hide 27 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. As evidence that yeah, people do actually read these long and informative articles: I laughed at Harsh V. Pant’s name.

  2. denk says:

    *India doesn’t like the CPEC, and China hawks in India are tempted to use it as an opportunity for mischief. And if US hawks are given greater rein in a Clinton presidency…*

    we keep hearing how the world’s ‘oldest democarcy’ and its ‘largest democracy’ share many ‘common values’.
    just what might these ‘values’ be ?
    other than hypocrisy, imperial dna, world class bs…
    both washington/delhi assume a lordly ‘extra territorial right’ to take out any perceived ‘threat’.
    under such mantra, hundreds of chinese workers/engineers have already died at the hand of cia/raw sponsored ‘terrarists’ in pakistan.

    gwadar today survives the best effort of cia/raw , i guess partly due to chinese tenacity or perhaps, its imperative for china to circumvent the murkkan/indian stranglehold on the malacca strait chokepoint

  3. 5371 says:

    Good piece, but Pakistan has a lot more than 180 million people. It was 192 million, without part of Baluchistan, in September 2011.

  4. denk says:

    *The most vital example of American state terrorism being translated into war and regime change is Pakistan, which is also currently the hottest spot in the government plan to ignite world war. It is here where you can clearly see the circular logic that fuels the terror war. American-funded “Islamists” are destabilizing Pakistan to justify American intervention to seize Pakistani nukes before the American-funded “Islamists” can get their hands on them. *

    cia’s playbook never change,
    unitedsnake ‘bombing’ its own jihadists foot soldiers in iraq, afpak, libya, syria, yemen, mali,……

    the arsonist coming back to the crime scene to ‘fight’ the fire ,
    works like a charm since 1875 !

  5. denk says:

    How long will the countries targeted by American/Islamist limited warfare continue to tolerate this bold assault? China, in particular, is presently bound by the economic chains that have been forged with the United States. How much longer will it continue to abide provocations in Xinjiang and other Chinese interests from Central Asia, to Pakistan, to Africa? It would be extremely unprofitable right now for China to haul the United States before the UN Security Council or to take military actions in retaliation for this low-intensity war that has been waged upon them. But that will not always be true. When the American house of cards finishes collapsing all bets will be off.

  6. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says:

    Peter Lee, you no like other nation provoking tension inside China. You say to foreign devil, ‘China not your business’.

    Then, why you point finger at white people and say ‘racist’ about stuff happen in America?
    It not your business.

    You Chinese act ‘racist’ to Tibetan and Muslim and keep power.

    And in US, white folk do what they need to survive. But US already ruled by Jew and Homo, and that no good.
    It sort of like how China once ruled by Manchus who no good.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Anonymous
  7. foo says:

    Lee is a chinaman. It’s prudent to take everything he says with a large grain of salt (like a sandbag full). Maybe with a little cut of tasty dog by the side. yummy!

  8. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Oh brother. Get ready for an influx of Indian trolls on this site lol.

  9. Mr. Lee:

    I’m a relatively busy person, so if you want to introduce me to the idea that “The World’s Most Dangerous Letters Are Not SCS…They’re CPEC,” you may want to summarize the article in 600 words or less. (300 would be preferable.)

    Thank you.

  10. AG says:

    Any country with nuke is not place to promote political turmoil. You never know whose hand get to nuke button.

    Thanks God no nuke in Syria. If ISIS controlled nuke, they could…………..

  11. Seraphim says:

    I am a bit too lazy and disorganized to check it, but I think I was on record somewhere saying that India was the weak link of BRICS and a possible trojan elephant in SCO.
    I was quoting a line from a post of M. K. Bhadrakumar of 2009 in Asia Times about Sino-Indian frictions, resulting from a provocative visit by the Indian PM to the state of Arunachal Pradesh:
    “The Americans are vastly experienced with the Indians’ Himalayan ego and by now they know well enough where and how to tickle Indian vanities. How they pedal fresh dreams to the Indians and pick up the fruits of their endeavors will be keenly watched not only by the multitude of Indians back at home, but also by the Pakistanis, Chinese and the Russians.”

    Bhadrakumar was referring to some comments made by China’s People Daily, dealing with what Beijing assessed to be the core issue – India’s obsession with superpower status born out of its rooted complexes of having “constantly been under foreign rule … throughout history” and its “recklessness and arrogance” towards its neighbors. “The dream of superpower is mingled with the thought of hegemony, which places the South Asian giant in an awkward situation and results in its repeated failure,”…
    “To everyone’s disappointment, India pursues a foreign policy of ‘befriend the far and attack the near’ … India, which vows to be a superpower, needs to have its eyes on relations with neighbors and abandon its recklessness and arrogance as the world is undergoing earthshaking changes…
    People’s Daily… underlined that Delhi was seriously mistaken if it estimated that China could be hustled into a border settlement with India through pressure tactics. It affirmed categorically that the border dispute could be settled or a substantial step forward approaching a final solution could be taken “only on the condition that both of them [China and India] are ready to shake off the traditional and deep-seated misunderstandings”.
    Two, the commentary alleged that Delhi was getting “disoriented when making decisions” because it harbored a notion that the US was viewing India as a counterweight to China. Delhi was also becoming susceptible to the US stratagem to “woo India away from Russia and China and, in the meantime, feeding India’s ambition to match China force by force by its ever burgeoning arms sales to India”.
    Since the electoral victory of BJP, the Americans had increasing opportunities to massage the “Himalayan ego”, and it looked like India is eager to return the favor.

    But, on the other hand “China on Wednesday said it backs the entry of India and Pakistan into the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) and was willing to work with other members to complete the procedures for their accession. – See more at:

    “In other developments”:
    “the recent agreement between Russia, Iran and Azerbaijan on the establishment of a North-South Transportation Corridor along the Caspian Sea is likely to transform the economies of the entire Eurasia from Russia to fellow SCO country India. The corridor will connect some of the world’s largest cities including Mumbai, Moscow, and Tehran on to Iran’s Caspian Port of Bandar Anzali and from there on to Russia’s Caspian port Astrakhan at the mouth of Volga River….
    Over 40 countries and international organizations, including Indonesia, India, China, Thailand, Cambodia and Israel, have expressed a desire to create a trade zone with the EEU….
    countries including India and Afghanistan have started supporting China’s stance on South China Sea….
    Russia is going to hold (did it already) its version of Russia-ASEAN summit and is also planning extended co-operation between ASEAN, Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) and Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). Details of “consultations” between these regional groups are likely to emerge after the meetings.”
    Ah, I forgot “Russia and Indonesia have signed a defence cooperation agreement, as Moscow looks to bolster its ties in Asia amid Western tensions”.

    Sri Lanka revived the project of Colombo Port City which seemed to be abandoned after the electoral victory of Maithripala Sirisena and soon will finalise a China-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement that would be formally signed next year, when the Chinese prime minister visits Colombo. Meanwhile, India’s efforts to get a comprehensive economic agreement with Sri Lanka faces strong opposition from that government.
    The ‘One Belt One Road’ goes forward unabated (and at high speed).

  12. KA says:

    Has anybody noticed the trajectory of the rise of the RSS-BJP? BJP had less than 3 seats in the parliament before 1987. It never had a mandate It never won an election before that . But after 1987, BJP created an atmosphere of :”Hinduism is in Peril” unless Mulsim women were liberated and the Muslims shrines were handed over to the Hindus ,Hinduism would disappear .
    RSS created and managed the periodic annual massacre of the Mulsims later of Christians before each election cycle starting from 1987. Indian mass also started changing .There is an open attempt to denigrate the secular freedom movement leaders .Books are being rewritten to focus on ancient and medieval Indian glory based on Hinduism and the

    past is being invoked to establish a newly minted version Indian identity that would only be strong as long as it is Hinduistic in orientation .

    They have got some new Harvard and Columbia University based scholars .One of them was actually removed from Harvard because of vile racism , even for Harvard his racism was too strong a pill to swallow .

    RSS has been a Hitler worshiper in 30s and 40s . It was pretty anti Jews in those days . Now it is big friend of Israel. One of the reasons of pro Israeli bias is that it plays well among the antiMuslim Indian voters .It is kind of payback for the centuries of Muslim oppression of the peaceful tolerant knowledge seeking Hindus .Another reason is Pakistan.

    I tell my Indian friends not to forget what followed 1857 “Sepoy Mutiny” .That was pivotal moment for the Indian Brahmin upper caste tribe They saw it as an opportunity of getting rid of Muslim elements and eventually all non Hindu elements from Indian history ,religion, culture architecture and literature . Their hope was British would support them in the endeavor. British did but only to a point Then the British changed the strategy Pakistan was the result of that policy .

  13. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I remember the port of Gwadar being bombed by one of the Mashuds, Abdullah or Batullah, after he left Gitmo! Sometime in the mid aughties.

  14. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says:

    Peter Flea, why you no see big picture?

    It obvious that China lose northwest China in little time.

    I no see Tibetan taking Tibet back. I no see Mongol take back Mongol part.

    But NW China have Muslim and they have many kids. Han Chinese now no have kid. Every generation, Han Chinee population go down 45%. In Shanghai, birthrate 0.8%. Chinee no have kid. Smart Chinee esp no have kid. They too much into material stuff and narcissism. Chinee in big trouble. There was time, Peter Flea, when Han Chinese 96% of Chinee population. They now only 89% of population. In time, NW China be very Muslim because Muslim have kiddie. And Central Asia Muslims send more Muslim folk into Northwest. That part become like Kosovo or New Mexico. You see New Mexico now just part of Mexico. Serb lose Kosovo. US looking to Kosovo-ize NW of China.

    NW China one day be just part of Afghanistan/Pakistan and US-Zio-Globo-Empire. Chinee lose NW because Han Chinese no more into people and family. They into money and jewelry. That nice but no longterm lifey in such stuff, no matter how expensive. If poor man have 4 kids, his kind go on after he die. But if rich man have 20 luxury cars and no kids, after he die, he no leave nothing behind. And cars go to government as death tax. Han Chinee like rich guy with fancy cars but no kids.

    Also, Peter Flea, you Han Chinee lose control of women. In Muslim NW, Muslim men control Muslim women and they have kiddie together. That means more Muslims for future generation.

    But Han Chinee women now modern and free, and they only care about TV soap opera, pop music, jewelry, shoes, and fancy stuff and travel. And because they free, they leave China and have children with non-chinee men and their kids no longer Chinee. They only marry men if men give them money and stuff. It all about materialism.

    Same in Singapore. Chinee there most successful, but success lead to failure cuz Han Chinese women there only love money and Chinee boy only love video game. No have kids. No matter how successful in school or make money, if you no have kids, your people finished. No good.

    Han Chinese, like Japan folks and Korean folks, a failure. They only success in short term with money. In long term, they become like Europeans who only know individual hedonism, money, pop culture, and ideology. They no have kids, so they are doomed as race.
    No have sense of biology and culture. So, Muslims take over Europe. And Muslim soon take over all of NW, and Han Chinee lose out.

    Also, Han Chinee lose best people to West.
    China send so many best people to West to study, learn stuff, and come back. But when they come to West, they like good life and no go back. They serve the West, not East. IF there war between US and China, all those Chinee who come to US side with US against mother country. They rejoice over US smashing China real good like in Opium Wars. Chinee women come to US and notice western men superior to geeky chinee men like Peter Flea. They say ‘Chinese Male Exclusion Act’ in My Womb. They look at geek like Peter Flea and think, ‘No dogs and Chinese men in my womb’. It is like how Amy Chua and so many Chinee girlie marry Jew with meater. Peter Flea, you no compete. You yellow loser. Your women come to US, use womb to produce white/Jewish/black kid, and they side with US against China.
    But even pure-blood Chinee in US all addicted to rap music, pop culture, Hollywood, and Political Correctness. They love US and hate China. They think US better cuz US have ‘gay marriage’, something worshiped by yellow folks in US because yellow folks just follow the power.

    Peter Flea, if you Chinee serious, then you stop soulless materialism and restore respect for family and life. And then, Han Chinese take firm control of NW China.

    But Han Chinee no have kid, and Han Chinee woman dream of coming to US and have kids for non-Chinee men. And their kids all become American and use their talent and passion to support US against China.

    China think, ‘we send Chinee to America, they remain patriot, they learn stuff, and they help mother country’.
    But it not happen such way. Chinee come here, turn back on China, wanna stay, wanna be American, wanna support US against China. They collaborators. And chinee women no wanna have your kid, Peter Flea. They see you as loser geek. Their womb have ‘no chinaman policy’.

    So, if you Chinee serious people, then you stop sending people to America. Stay in China. Also, stop the Negro invasion of China. Peter Frost say China already have over 1 million Negro. Negro have many kids. So, if Han Chinee no have kid but if negro in China have 6 kid each, then in no time, China have 50 million black. That no good. Blacks stronger and kick Chinee ass like they do in America. So many black kick Chinee ass all over America. Why China export best Chinese to America but import black savage from Africa? You Chinee crazy?

    Stay in Chiner, Peter Flea. Have more kids and have Han Chinese settle and take over NW.
    Demography is destiny as fortune cookie say.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Anonymous
  15. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Priss Factor

    Why do you use multiple sock puppet accounts to leave so many excessively long comments at The Unz Review? Using sock puppet accounts are against the site’s policy and you can condense the substance of your comments to a couple sentences.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  16. Rehmat says:

    Both China and India don’t give a hoot to what India think of China-Pakistan friendship. India, an artificial state, has been a basket-cake of Soviet Russia, United States, and Israel.

    In April 2015, Chinese president Xi Jinping accompanied by his wife paid a two-day official visit to Pakistan. He hammer out $46 billion deal – mostly to generate more opportunities for firms hit by slack growth at home.

    Pakistan-China friendship goes back to 1950s when Pakistan became the first Muslim-majority nation to end official diplomatic relation with US-occupied Taiwan. The relations with Communist-ruled China took major turn after the China-India War in 1960 which resulted in military humiliated of Pakistan’s No.1 regional enemy.

    China like Soviet has long viewed Pakistan as a ‘corridor’ via Gawadar to reach Persian Sea for its year-round trade with the outside world. Furthermore, a friendly Pakistan is good for its Israel-style occupation of Muslim-majority East Turkistan.

    Suhrawardy was the first Pakistani prime minister to visit Peking in late 1960s. China’s prime minister Zhou Enlai visited Pakistan in 1964. Pakistan’s first military dictator, Gen. Muhammad Ayub Khan visited China in March 1965 on invitation of Zhou Enlai and used the opportunity to pave Henry Kissinger’s visit to Peking which was followed by US president Nixon visit to China.

    China routed out Indian forces in the 1960s. Since then, India has avoided to offend Peking.

    Since its independence from British Raj on August 15, 1947 – there are close to one hundred local resistance groups fighting against Hindu upper-class dominated Indian government. Most of these religious and ethnic minority resistance groups beget their violence from the rising Hindu religious terrorism based on racism. These groups operate in Assam (31), Nagaland (21), Meghalaya (5), and Occupied Jammu & Kashmir (34). Two of India’s prime ministers, Indira Gandhi and her son Rajiv Gandhi (d.1984) were assassinated by her Sikh bodyguards and a Tamil Hindu woman.

    • Replies: @Shredni Vashtar
  17. Olorin says:

    Expect problems of this sort where nations have few navigable inland waterways.

  18. haha, jeez, incoherent comments galore.

    peter touched a few nerves. keep on trucking mr lee.

  19. Seraphim says:

    But can’t you see that “Anonymny’ is a troll? His desperate attempt to look funny gives him away. All he succeeds to do is to look plain silly.

  20. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Priss Factor

    Although you could have been a little more articulate, I agree with what you say.

  21. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Priss Factor

    How is that racist? They’re the same race as Chinese. Is the UK racist to Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland?

  22. Historian says:

    Exiles can dream big, but demographics is destiny.

    Inner Mongolia is 80% Han Chinese, and the Mongol population has been thoroughly sinified.

    There are now more Han Chinese in Xinjiang than Uyghurs. The Hui identify more closely with their Han cousins than with their Uyghur co-religionists. The Kazakhs don’t like the Chinese, but they don’t want to live under Uyghur rule either. That makes 60% of the population opposed to a Uyghurstan.

    Tibet is still majority-Tibetan, but the railroad has ended Tibet’s isolation. Any rebellion will be quickly suppressed.

  23. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Priss Factor

    Found the Indian troll lol.

  24. denk says:

    An anti-American Islamic fanatic is arrested in Afghanistan, flown to Guantanamo Bay and then released back to Afghan authorities. He’s supposedly seething with anti-Americanism. But after crossing the border and returning to Pakistan, his first mission is to kidnap and kill a Chinese engineer.
    In doing so, Abdullah Mehsud also becomes the first Pakistani to kill a Chinese citizen on Pakistani soil in a high profile case, creating an unfortunate precedent in the sixty-year long history of close Sino-Pak ties.Mehsud was anti-American. Or was he? We haven’t seen him target any high or low profile American assets since the famous 2004 kidnappings.

    • Replies: @utu
  25. utu says:

    And what about Uyghurs? Who trains them, who gives them money…? Connection to Grey Wolves, Turkish subcontractors of Gladio?

    • Replies: @denk
  26. denk says:

    yes of course.
    tam, violence in tibet, bloodbath in xinjiang and beyond, unrest in hk are all made in usa.
    due to increasing terror attacks, since 2015 beijing cops started carrying sidearms,
    thank you very much uncle sham !

    aq, boko haram, isis, abu sayaf…all that craps !
    all terror leads to washington, this should be obvious to anyone paying attention.

    i’ve a hunch the lone gun man who killed dozens of hk tourists in ph,
    the gruesome murder of chinese sailors in the mekong are also cia FF

    my hunch has never failed me so far ~!

  27. @Rehmat

    “India, an artificial state, has been a basket-cake of Soviet Russia, United States, and Israel.”

    Basket-cake, huh…and what about you? Some kind of nut-cake?

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Peter Lee Comments via RSS
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World