Axis of Evil

China and Russia’s awkward romance
By Jonathan Hillman

Oriental despots: Xi Jinping hosted Vladimir Putin in Beijing to discuss increasing economic and military cooperation between their two countries. June 25, 2016. 

This week, Chinese dictator Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin are capitalizing on President Trump’s absence from two major summits. 

Putin met with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in Singapore, and Xi will attend the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Papua New Guinea. 

In Asia, where economics is strategy, Xi and Putin are not only showing up but claiming to champion a new approach to globalization.
Lately, Xi and Putin like calling for openness and inclusivity, appropriating Western language to fuel resentment in many of the places that have benefited from globalization the most. 

They even pledged to link their signature economic visions in 2015, a political act kept alive by endless joint statements and signing ceremonies, including those last week. 

China’s Belt and Road Initiative promises $1 trillion of new infrastructure, trade deals and stronger cultural ties with over 80 countries. 

The Eurasian Economic Union puts Russia at the center of a single market for goods, services, capital and labor.
The problem is not American ignorance of this threat but the absence of a coherent strategy in meeting it. 

“Moscow and Beijing share a common interest in weakening U.S. global influence and are actively cooperating in that regard,” the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency concluded in a 2017 report. 

But unintentionally, the cumulative effect of U.S. sanctions against Russia and tariffs against China could hasten the very threat Washington seeks to avoid: an anti-Western authoritarian partnership between the world’s largest nuclear power and second-largest economy.
That nightmare can still be avoided. 

Thankfully, the Sino-Russian partnership still has an artificial flavor, supported more by leaders-on-high than organic developments on the ground. 

After each round of ceremonial signings and partnership promises, China still towers above Russia in economic and demographic terms. 

With a long history of invasions, Russia’s paranoia about foreign powers approaching its borders will not vanish overnight.
But Russian policymakers must be persuaded to take China’s economic power as seriously as the West’s military power. 

China’s grand ambitions run through Russia and its neighbors, but its investments and infrastructure projects have not yet triggered alarms in Moscow. 

Russia is the gatekeeper for China’s overland push westward, but Xi now holds the keys in the form of investment and respect that Putin, economically and diplomatically isolated from the West, craves.
Washington should highlight the risks of China’s Belt and Road in Russia’s backyard. 

Three of the eight countries with the highest debt risk from Chinese lending are Russia’s close neighbors: Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and Mongolia. 

China can exploit the weakness of small economies that borrow big, as it did when it wrote off a portion of Tajikistan’s debt in exchange for disputed territory in 2011. 

Inevitably, as China’s economic footprint grows, so will its security footprint. 

Sightings of Chinese military vehicles and construction in Afghanistan’s Wakhan Corridor suggest this expansion is already underway.
To take the air out of Xi and Putin’s globalization tale, Trump’s trade policy must be updated. Yesterday, a memorandum of understanding was signed to boost trade between ASEAN and the Eurasian Economic Union. 

China is backing the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, a regional deal that gained momentum when Trump withdrew from the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership. 

Easier said than done, but the United States urgently needs to get back into the game of offering regional alternatives rather than bilateral ultimatums.
Finally, a bit of old-fashioned diplomacy would go a long way. 

For now, the United States does not need to choose between Russia and China, as President Richard Nixon famously did over four decades ago. 

It would be wiser to work selectively with both sides, toning down the “with us or against us” rhetoric and noting areas of existing cooperation. 

Before reflexively approving the next round of sanctions, American policymakers should carefully evaluate their longer-term consequences, such as encouraging the rise of alternative payment systems, harm to the dollar, and pushing U.S. competitors closer.
With restraint and patience, the United States could reestablish itself as a natural wedge between Russia and China. 

At the very least, it must avoid becoming a bridge that unites them.

Who is at risk from China’s Belt and Road Initiative debt trap?

China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is raising the risk of a sovereign debt default among small and poor countries
By Nikita Kwatra

China BRI will potentially span 68 countries and could have implications for each of these countries’ public debt.

Mumbai -- China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) which seeks to invest about $8 trillion in infrastructure projects across Asia, Europe and Africa, has come under intense scrutiny, not least due to suspicions over China’s intent behind the ambitious project. 

A study by the Centre for Global Development, a Washington-based think tank, analyses one important consequence of BRI: debt.
While the study finds that it is unlikely that the BRI will be plagued with wide-scale debt sustainability problems, it is likely to raise the risk of a sovereign debt default among relatively small and poor countries.
The BRI will potentially span 68 countries and could have implications for each of these countries’ public debt. 

To understand these effects, the study first uses sovereign credit risk ratings and World Bank debt sustainability analysis to identify 23 of the 68 countries currently at risk of debt distress. 

For these 23 countries, the study adds the Belt and Road Initiative lending pipeline into the countries’ overall debt and debt to China as of end of 2016.
They find that eight countries could face difficulties in servicing their debt because of the Belt and Road Initiative. 

These include Pakistan, Djibouti, the Maldives, Laos, Mongolia, Montenegro, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan. 

Pakistan, which through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, serves as the centrepiece of the BRI and is by far the largest country exposed, with China reportedly financing about 80% of its estimated $62 billion debt. 

According to the think-tank, China’s case-by-case approach in dealing with debt relief in the past could prove “problematic”.
One example is China’s acquisition of Sri Lanka’s Hambantota port after the Sri Lankan government failed to service its debt.
Unlike most of the world’s other major creditors, China is not bound to a set of rules on how it addresses debtor repayment problems. 

Currently, China is only an ad hoc participant of the Paris Club, a collection of creditor nations which follow a set of rules in dealing with debtor nations. 

The think-tank advocates applying globally-accepted creditor disciplines and standards to the Belt and Road Initiative.
To do this, they recommend the World Bank and other multilateral banks work with the Chinese government to set the lending standards for the BRI projects.
Another recommendation is to establish a new creditor’s group which would maintain the core principles of the Paris Club.
To mitigate lending risks, China is also recommended to provide technical and legal support to developing countries. 

Finally, the think tank proposes that China should offer debt swap arrangements in support of environmental goals where borrowing country debt is forgiven in exchange for a commitment to an environmental objective, for instance, forest preservation.

China's debt traps

China's Silk Road project runs into debt jam
By Julien Girault
China's dictator Xi Jinping says trade with Belt and Road countries has exceeded $5 trillion

China's massive and expanding "Belt and Road" trade infrastructure project is running into speed bumps as some countries begin to grumble about being buried under Chinese debt.
First announced in 2013 by Xi Jinping, the initiative also known as the "new Silk Road" envisions the construction of railways, roads and ports across the globe, with Beijing providing billions of dollars in loans to many countries.
Five years on, Xi has found himself defending his treasured idea as concerns grow that China is setting up debt traps in countries which lack the means to pay back the Asian giant.
"It is not a China club," Xi said in a speech on Monday to mark the project's anniversary, describing Belt and Road as an "open and inclusive" project.
Xi said China's trade with Belt and Road countries had exceeded $5 trillion, with outward direct investment surpassing $60 billion.
But some are starting to wonder if it is worth the cost.
During a visit to Beijing in August, Malaysia's Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said his country would shelve three China-backed projects, including a $20 billion railway.
The party of Pakistan's new prime minister, Imran Khan, has vowed more transparency amid fears about the country's ability to repay Chinese loans related to the multi-billion-dollar China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.
China's "new Silk Road" envisions the construction of railways, roads and ports across the globe

Meanwhile the exiled leader of the opposition in the Maldives, Mohamed Nasheed, has said China's actions in the Indian Ocean archipelago amounted to a "land grab" and "colonialism", with 80 percent of its debt held by Beijing.
Sri Lanka has already paid a heavy price for being highly indebted to China.
Last year, the island nation had to grant a 99-year lease on a strategic port to Beijing over its inability to repay loans for the $1.4-billion project.

Ambiguous partner
"China does not have a very competent international bureaucracy in foreign aid, in expansion of soft power," Anne Stevenson-Yang, co-founder and research director at J Capital Research, told AFP.
"So not surprisingly they're not very good at it, and it brought up political issues like Malaysia that nobody anticipated," she said.
"As the RMB (yuan) becomes weaker, and China is perceived internationally as a more ambiguous partner, it's more likely that the countries will take a more jaundiced eye on these projects."
The huge endeavour brings much-needed infrastructure improvements to developing countries, while giving China destinations to unload its industrial overcapacity and facilities to stock up on raw materials.
Chinese dictator Xi Jinping (C) says the initiative is 'not a China club'

But a study by the Center for Global Development, a US think-tank, found serious concerns about the sustainability of the sovereign debt in eight countries receiving Silk Road funds.
Those were Pakistan, Djibouti, Maldives, Mongolia, Laos, Montenegro, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan.
The cost of a China-Laos railway project—$6.7 billion—represents almost half of the Southeast Asian country's GDP, according to the study.
In Djibouti, the IMF has warned that the Horn of Africa country faces a "high risk of debt distress" as its public debt jumped from 50 percent of GDP in 2014 to 85 percent in 2016.
Africa has long embraced Chinese investment, helping make Beijing the continent's largest trading partner for the past decade.
On Monday, a number of African leaders will gather in Beijing for a summit focused on economic ties which will include talks on the "Belt and Road" programme.

'Not a free lunch'
China bristles at criticism.
Sri Lanka has already paid a heavy price for being highly indebted to China

At a daily press briefing on Friday, foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying denied that Beijing was saddling its partners with onerous debt, saying that its loans to Sri Lanka and Pakistan were only a small part of those countries' overall foreign debt.
Stevenson-Yang said China's loans are quoted in dollar terms, "but in reality they're lending in terms of tractors, shipments of coal, engineering services and things like that, and they ask for repayment in hard currency."
Standard & Poor's said Beijing structures the infrastructure projects as long-term concessions, with a Chinese firm operating the facility for a period of 20 to 30 years while splitting the proceeds with the local counterpart or government.
The head of the International Monetary Fund, Christine Lagarde, raised concerns about potential debt problems in April and advocated greater transparency.
"It's not a free lunch, it's something where everybody chips in," she said.

Chinese Peril

China’s touchiness over the Dalai Lama is in line with its aim of usurping Tibetan Buddhism
By Sanjay Kapoor

When the Tibetan Buddhist leader, His Holiness the Dalai Lama, visited Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh, the Chinese media saw red. 

It promptly announced that India would be punished for allowing the Dalai Lama to visit a disputed region, claimed by China. 

The promised reprisal is unveiling slowly. 

If the government is not wise to the Chinese threat, then India could face serious aggravation on its border.
The question that many would ask is why is the Chinese government under Xi Jinping so prickly about the Dalai Lama and the importance accorded to him in India and elsewhere? 

There are no simple answers, but China’s muscular response to the Dalai Lama and India suggests an intense power struggle in Beijing before the Standing Committee to the Politburo is reconstituted later this year. 

What is also visible is that the Chinese government wants to control the Tibetan Buddhist leadership succession after this Dalai Lama.

Thorny issue
One key step to this was already accomplished long ago, when the Chinese installed a pro-China Panchen Lama in Lhasa. 

Obedient to the party and loyal to the Chinese State, the Panchen Lama is being pushed forward as an alternative to the Dalai Lama, a man widely loved by Tibetans as their supreme religious leader.
Xi, whose power and influence are no less than those of the late Mao Zedong or Deng Xiaoping, would not like to be seen as a weak leader unable to defend the territorial integrity of China by not making an example of the Dalai Lama, who wants greater autonomy for the Tibet region, and his supporters. 

China’s response has understandably progressed from being perfunctory to threatening.
Countries that do business with China have learnt to their discomfort how badly it reacts to any nation extending hospitality to the Dalai Lama. 

They made an example of Mongolia that tried to assert its independence from China’s arc of influence when it agreed to a visit by the Dalai Lama. 

Mongolia initially believed in the fiction that India could compensate for China’s expected estrangement, but it did not turn out that way. 

Cash-strapped Mongolia that had needed China’s munificence all these years sought a grant from India for sorting its economic troubles, but New Delhi, despite promising a credit line, could not cough up the money when Ulaanbaatar needed it the most. 

Mongolia had to bend low in front of China for a bailout and also commit that it would not host the Dalai Lama ever again.
Indian government officials have been expressing helplessness over how the events connected with the Dalai Lama have panned out. 

“We do not really have much to do,” they say. 

“If the Dalai Lama decides to travel to Mongolia or meet the President of India as part of a delegation of Nobel Prize winners then what does the Indian government have to do?”
China’s foreign policy hawks remain unimpressed by these explanations and there are plenty of reactions emanating from their publications that claim that India has hosted a Kalachakra event in Bodhgaya where Buddhist scholars had come from different parts of the world. 

The Chinese did not allow visas for Tibetan Buddhists to travel to India. 

There are other issues that rankle the Chinese – for instance, the remark of the Arunachal Pradesh chief minister that his state borders Tibet and not China.

Tibetan Buddhism in turmoil
The Chinese want to teach India and the Dalai Lama a lesson. 

With this explicit purpose, they have been working towards deepening the cleavages that exist in the Tibetan school of Buddhism. 

Ever since the Dalai Lama excommunicated a tantric spirit, Dorje Shugden, which was also presented as a protector of his Gelug School, Tibetan Buddhism is in turmoil. 

The controversy has attracted attention in the West following demonstrations by Dorje Shugden practitioners, especially Kelsang Gyatso’s Britain-based New Kadampa Tradition which broke away from the Gelug school in 1991. 

Other factions supporting Dorje Shugden are Serpom Monastic University and Shar Ganden monastery, both of which separated from the Gelug mainstream in 2008.
The Dalai Lama had called Dorje Shugden a “dark force” that undermines the practices of the Gelugpas. 

As the Dalai Lama wants to foster a harmonious community, he shunned a force whose practices were considered aggressively divisive.
The shunning of the 17th-century spirit has seen a backlash from many members of this faith who have been protesting all over the world. 

They claim that the Dalai Lama is dictatorial and does not allow the freedom of religious practices within the faith. 

On the other hand, the Dalai Lama and his millions of followers see the hand of the Chinese in the spread of resistance by the followers of Dorje Shugden. 

Their endeavour is to hurt the credibility of the Dalai Lama and show him up as a divisive leader who cannot be trusted to lead the Tibetan Buddhist community within Tibet and outside.

China hand
On February 4, 1997, the bizarre murder took place of the principal teacher of Buddhist dialectics, Lobsang Gyatso, and his two students in Dharamsala. 

The police investigation linked the murder to Dorje Shugden followers in the community of exiles. 

A further probe revealed that the perpetrators of the crime escaped to China. 

Later, there was reportedly an attempt to kill a close associate of the Dalai Lama and blame it on the Tibetan exile establishment in India. 

The conspiracy was discovered in time and nipped in the bud.
News agency Reuters conducted an investigation into the Chinese involvement in building the Dorje Shugden resistance to the Dalai Lama. 

The report showed that the Chinese communist party and some of its frontal organisations were involved in promoting Shugden followers as opposed to those of the Dalai Lama. 

The probe revealed that the Shugden followers were financed to rebuild monasteries and placed in important positions. 

To reiterate, the purpose was to diminish the authority of the Dalai Lama and then ensure that his word does not really carry much weight when he prophesies his successor.
Indian government sources claim that China has worked hard to control the narrative on Tibetan Buddhism, especially when it comes to undermining the authority of the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan exile establishment and the sway it has in religious matters.
China has ensured that the number of Tibetans in the community of exiles who provided leadership is falling dramatically. 

The Karmapa Lama has brought out this fact in an exclusive interview to Hardnews. 

He said that the growing influence of China has resulted in many Tibetans leaving India. 

Some have returned to China and many others have left for a destination in Europe or the US due to the problems they face relating to identity papers and travel documents provided by India. 

The Karmapa said that 4,000-5,000 Tibetans are leaving India every year without being replaced by fresh refugees from Tibet. 

Many, who went a few years ago from India to Tibet, find it difficult to return.
This reporter met some of these Hindi-speaking Tibetans in Lhasa. 

They had crossed over from India at a time when border surveillance was lackadaisical. Subsequently, they found it difficult to return to India – a country they missed due to the freedom of expression, prevalence of English, and its multi-culturalism.
Ever since the Chinese tightened the squeeze on the movement of Tibetan monks who earlier routinely walked through the forbidding heights of the Himalaya to reach Dharamsala, the desperation in the Tibetan exile establishment has been growing. 

They also worry over the increasing influence of China globally and how other countries are kowtowing to it. 

As stated earlier, many countries just do not want to entertain the Dalai Lama anymore, lest it antagonise Beijing. 

Countries that are recipient of Chinese investments are particularly cautious.

Succession question
In these circumstances, the Chinese are growing more confident that they will be able to question the authority of the Dalai Lama. 

Their advantage is that they control the second most important leader, the Panchen Lama, and several other senior Lamas who populate the many monasteries in Tibet. 

Rather cleverly, they are funding many of the Tibetan monks from the East Tibetan region, where the Dalai Lama does not have much sway, and bringing them to the area around Lhasa. 

These monks are followers of the Dorje Shugden school of thought and driven by the desire to retrieve Tibetan Buddhism from the control of the Dalai Lama.
Bolstering Chinese hold over the Tibetan Buddhist narrative is that it will not recognise any of the reincarnations until Rule 5, as laid down by the Chinese government, is followed. 

Though the Chinese government would say it is “secular” and would not like to interfere in the process of selection of the Dalai Lama’s successor, it is actually preparing the ground for it to be decider on who will really lead the Tibetan Buddhists. 

Insiders say Beijing is in a position to reject the Dalai Lama’s nominee.
His detractors even claim that he is not keen on announcing his successor as he wants to destroy his own sect. 

It is a vicious no-holds-barred campaign with the Chinese government displaying a tenacity to not just control the region but its religion too. 

Its phenomenal economic rise in the past 20 years has given the Chinese government an opportunity to neuter the only threat it has to its integrity.

India’s concerns
India, which has provided refuge to lakhs of Tibetan Buddhist refugees, is a bit diffident about its Tibet strategy. 

While it is monitoring what kind of punishment it will be dealt for allowing the Dalai Lama to visit Arunachal Pradesh, it is not actually setting out to provoke Beijing. 

It is China that interprets Indian actions harshly.
There is a view that Xi could use the threat to punish India as an opportunity to firmly establish the balance of power in Beijing’s favour. 

The manner in which China has colonised Pakistan through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor and the way it has made Russia do its bidding in the region leaves little space for India to manoeuvre.
What compounds New Delhi’s worries is that its Tibet policy and the fact that it has agreed to host so many refugees since the 1960s was largely supported by the United States. 

Now the US, under Donald Trump, has a different view of the world. 

Unexpectedly, he sent a delegation to the Belt and Road forum hosted by China. 

India did not attend, hoping to find takers for its opposition to Beijing’s policy to “colonise” countries in Africa and Asia by masking its real intentions under the garb of this communication initiative.
This is a setback for India. 

It is, in many ways, left with a policy that has few takers in a transformed world. 

Now, the question is: how will India deal with Tibetan Buddhists in the future? 

Leverage their presence to put the Chinese on the defensive or get real with the fact that the numbers of the refugees will diminish further unless they are given Indian citizenship? 

This would also involve realignment of the way Tibet is perceived by Indian strategists.

India Drives Mongolia Into China’s Submission

By Shastri Ramachandran

The Dalai Lama in Mongolia

Prime Minister Narendra Modi was the first-ever Indian Prime Minister to visit Mongolia. 

He may also be the last, as Mongolia now wishes that he had never come.
Thereby hangs a sordid tale of how the cookie crumbled in the steppes; how the itinerant dream merchant fed false hopes to a credulous but friendly and trusting people; and, how Mongolia – when squeezed by China to apologise for the Dalai Lama’s visit and promise to never again invite him – learned the hard way that India would neither come to its aid nor deliver on its promises. 

Beijing made Ulaanbaatar kowtow, and that was a resounding slap on New Delhi’s face.
Our story begins in May 2015.
Prime Minister Modi travelled to Ulaanbaatar from China, told people in the land of Genghis Khan of Buddhism in India, and of Buddhism, among other civilisational links, being common to India and Mongolia. 

He also announced a credit line of $1 billion and assured the Mongolian leaders that India would extend support in diverse fields and increase exports to Mongolia. 

This was the text.
Pictures showed PM Modi patting a Mongol horse and trying his hand at archery – the symbolism of posing with a bow and arrow aimed unmistakably at Beijing. 

That underscored the subtext.
Modi’s billion-dollar pledge came as a big boost to Mongolia, which is locked between China and Russia, and overwhelmingly dependent on the former. 

Time was when Mongolia was in a clover, with the Russians and Chinese competing to win them over; and, Mongolia could leverage its ties with one power for bargaining with the other. 

If Moscow failed to respond to a felt need, Ulaanbaatar could always seek Beijing’s help; and vice versa.
Lately, that has changed. 

Russia and China have become allies and Russia too is more dependent on China as the greater power especially in the aftermath of the U.S.-led sanctions triggered by the retaking of Crimea.
As a result, Ulaanbaatar can no longer call on the Kremlin to help when Beijing is uncooperative. 

A poor country, with a GDP of about $ 35 billion, Mongolia now feels “trapped” between Russia and China, particularly with the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) as the only show in the region.
This brings us to the subtext of Modi’s visit: For New Delhi, it was a successful foray into “China’s backyard”. 

It was also a message to Beijing that should it seeks to step up its ‘presence’ in Sri Lanka – which is India’s “zone of influence” – then it should be prepared to face India in its own backyard. 

In fact, the $1 billion pledged by Modi was India’s answer to the few billion dollars China was pouring into Sri Lanka.
The Mongolian leadership saw Prime Minister Modi’s visit as the arrival of a “new power” that would be a counter to China. 

It was led to believe that it would enjoy India’s support in standing up to China. 

Indian support, Ulaanbaatar felt, could be critical in the event of Chinese pressure becoming unbearable at a time when Russia can no longer come to its rescue.
The Prime Minister’s visit gave rise to new expectations of economic as well as geopolitical gains. Mongolia naively saw India as a strategic friend that could help Ulaanbaatar stand up to Beijing.
This sense of strength and support, which the Monglians (mistakenly) perceived they were drawing from India, was palpable when I visited Ulaanbaatar in July 2016. 

To be Indian was special. 

After all, Mongolia was expecting a billion dollars from India.
“When will this credit line start flowing,” was a question that men, and women, who matter kept popping at me. 

I had not the heart to disabuse them of their hopes and expectations, when they saw me as the one who had come down from the elephant which is out to slay the dragon.
The crisis erupted in November 2016.
The Dalai Lama, perhaps encouraged by New Delhi, went on a four-day visit to Mongolia. 

This was his ninth trip to a place where he is revered, and his photo is kept in many monasteries. China resented this provocation, objected to the Dalai’s visit and warned Ulaanbaatar against hosting him. 

Ulaanbaatar, confident of India’s support, defied Beijing to receive the Dalai Lama.
China struck swiftly with an unprecedented economic blockade. 

The sanctions paralysed Mongolia’s economy and trade. 

China slapped a levy on Mongolian goods and trucks entering China. 

As Russia is too tied to China, Mongolia turned to India, and asked for the promised one billion dollars.
Ambassador Gonchig Ganbold, who met Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) officials, told a leading English daily: “It’s important that India raises its voice against the unilateral measures China is taking against us which is hurting our people especially when severe winter is upon us.” 

Silence, he said, could be construed as giving China a “pass” for its behaviour.
The MEA spokesman’s response was: As a close friend of Mongolia, which India regards as its ‘third neighbour’ and ‘spiritual neighbour’, we are ready to work with the Mongolian people in this time of their difficulty.
However, Modi Administration was in a funk. 

There was no trace of the muscle the Prime Minister had displayed to much applause in Ulaanbaatar in May 2015. 

Any action to ease Mongolia’s difficulties would have meant inviting China’s wrath. 

Predictably, the political leadership turned a deaf ear to Mongolia’s desperate plea for help.
As a result, on December 21, Ulaanbaatar apologised abjectly to Beijing. 

Mongolian Foreign Minister Tsend Munkh-Orgil promised that the Dalai Lama would no longer be allowed to enter his country.
Ulaanbaatar fell in line and Beijing resumed the stalled talks for a loan of $4.2 billion. 

Without China’s financial assistance, the Mongolian economy would collapse.
It is game, set and match to Beijing. 

This was an entirely avoidable fiasco arising from sheer misjudgement on the part of Mongolia, the Dalai Lama and the Government of India.

Chinese Crybaby

India rejects China's objection to President-Dalai Lama meet

• India on Friday dismissed Chinese objection to a meeting between the Dalai Lama and President Pranab Mukherjee
• External Affairs Ministry Spokesperson Vikas Swarup said it was a non-political event
• China had earlier expressed strong dissatisfaction towards the meeting

By Indrani Bagchi

President Pranab Mukherjee with Tibetan spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama at Rashtrapati Bhavan, in New Delhi on Sunday.

NEW DELHI -- India on Friday dismissed Chinese objection to a meeting between the Dalai Lama and President Pranab Mukherjee recently, saying he was a revered spiritual leader and it was a non-political event.
"India has a consistent position. His Holiness, the Dalai Lama is a respected and revered spiritual leader. It was a non-political event organised by Nobel laureates dedicated to the welfare of children," External Affairs Ministry Spokesperson Vikas Swarup said.
He was asked about China taking strong exception to the Tibetan spiritual leader's meeting with President Mukherjee at the Rashtrapathi Bhavan during a children's summit and asserting that India must respect China's "core interests" to avoid "any disturbance" to the bilateral ties.
"China strongly opposes any contacts between the Dalai Lama and officials of any countries. China has urged India to clearly recognize the Dalai Lama's anti-Chinese and separatist nature, to respect China's core interests and concerns, to take effective measures to eliminate the negative influences of the incident, and to avoid disturbing China-India ties," said Geng Shuang, spokesperson of Chinese Foreign Ministry. 

"Recently in disregard of China's solemn representation and strong opposition, the Indian side insisted on arranging for the 14th Dalai Lama's visit to the Indian Presidential palace, where he took part in an event and met President Mukherjee."
The Dalai Lama is scheduled to visit Arunachal Pradesh, an event that has already riled Beijing. The US ambassador to India, Richard Verma too, visited Arunachal Pradesh recently, inviting another storm of protests. 

Even the Karmapa Lama, 17th Gyalwang Karmapa Ogyen Trinley Dorje has been cleared to visit Arunachal Pradesh.
Last week, India had said that it would try to help Mongolia tide over an economic crisis in deep winter, after China imposed border tariffs on their goods as punishment for Mongolia hosting the Dalai Lama for the ninth time in their country.

When China bullies its neighbors, India gets more muscular

By Ilaria Maria Sala

China’s increasingly rough-handed and assertive foreign policy towards its neighbors is raising India’s diplomatic and economic clout in the region.
In recent weeks, Mongolia and Vietnam have provided striking examples of India’s new assertiveness.
Mongolia, China’s northern neighbor, a predominantly Buddhist country that follows the Tibetan form of the doctrine has once more received the Dalai Lama, sparking yet again China’s fury.

In response, as the Dalai Lama was giving lectures in Ulaanbaatar’s temples in November, Beijing hiked tariffs on Mongolian trucks moving through Chinese territory, slowing transport so severely that it has effectively turned into a blockade.
With its vehicles stopped at the border and winter temperatures already at -25 degrees Celsius, Mongolia may soon face shortages of essential goods. 

The Mongolian ambassador to Delhi, Gonchig Ganbold, is calling on India to act as an intermediary: “India should come out with clear support against the difficulties that have been imposed on Mongolia by China, which is an overreaction to the religious visit by His Holiness Dalai Lama. We have not changed our ‘One China’ policy, so Beijing’s response to Mongolia hosting the spiritual leader is really not justifiable,” he said on Dec. 7.
This latest spat comes just as Mongolia, which has been suffering from an economic downturn since the boom in commodities turned into a bust, was negotiating a $4.2 billion loan from Beijing.
After the Dalai Lama’s visit to Ulaanbaator, China has suspended all diplomatic talks indefinitely, and Mongolia has decided to shift to a discussion with the IMF and Delhi to obtain the needed cash. Vikas Swarup, of India’s ministry of external affairs, has pledged that India is “ready to work with Mongolian people in this time of their difficulty.”
Swarup also referred to the visit by India’s prime minister Narendra Modi to Mongolia in 2015—a first by an Indian head-of-state—during which a credit line of $1 billion was announced that Mongolia may now draw on.
Mongolia has long tried to counter the tyranny of its geography (the small landlocked nation is squashed between Russia and China) with what it terms the “Third Neighbor” foreign policy, an active pursuit of steady exchanges with countries other than Russia and China implemented since the 1990s, and India is shaping up to be one of these.
That does not sit very well with China, which described Ulaanbaatar’s calling on India for assistance “politically hare-brained”, in a typically aggressive editorial in one of its national newspapers.
The ongoing dispute in the South China Sea, meanwhile, has pitted China against all its maritime neighbors as Beijing attempts to claim all the islands and waters that sit inside the highly controversial “nine-dash line.”
Here India is intervening by providing military assistance.
When Narendra Modi visited Vietnam in September, he announced a $500 million credit line to Hanoi for “defense cooperation” and said India would “upgrade our strategic partnership to a comprehensive strategic partnership,” which would deepen education and support ties between the two countries’ military forces.
When Vietnam’s defense minister General Ngo Xuan Lich visited India this month, more contracts were signed directly with the Indian Ministry of Defense.
Indian Air Force pilots will train Vietnam’s People Army Air Force pilots to operate “multirole” combat aircraft, which are used in air to air and air to ground fighting, and construct patrol boats that will counter China’s ambitions in the South China Sea.
Beijing’s inability to deal with its neighbors in anything but an aggressive, ill-tempered manner is making it easy for India to put its “Look East” policy into action.

Chinese Aggressions

India must support Mongolia after China's crackdown post Dalai Lama's visit, imposition of toll tax
By Prakash Katoch

Just after the Dalai Lama visited Mongolia in November 2016 for four days, China’s tail caught fire. There was actually no apparent reason for going hyper since this was the ninth visit of Dalai Lama to Mongolia. 

But then China's comprehensive national power (CNP) has risen since, even as the economy is slowing down. 

China perhaps also wanted to signal strong resolve on Tibet to US President Donald Trump, other than the Communist Party of China (CPC) indicating to the Chinese public that it is in total control and can dictate terms to any country. 

So post the Dalai Lama’s visit to Ulan Bator, China forbade her officials from any interactions with Mongolia. 

But this is not all: Mongolian trucks crossing into China's autonomous province of Inner Mongolia are now charged a toll tax of Yuan 10 (Rs 97.9) per truck, and 0.1 percent of the worth of the cargo if it is beyond Yuan 10,000.
Mongolia’s Buddhist population was some 1,459,983 people during the census held in 2010, which was 53 percent of the total population of 2,753,685. 

As on January 2015, Mongolia's total population was estimated to be 3,000,251 people. 

About 59 percent of the total population is below age of 30 years, of which 27 percent are below the age of 14 years. 

This arbitrary Chinese action of imposing toll tax on Mongolia portrays the pettiness of the CPC; Mongolia being a country with GDP of $11.76 billion (2015 figures) that over the past 20 years has transformed into a vibrant multi-party democracy with booming economy, and is at the threshold of major transformation driven by exploitation of its vast mineral resources as per World Bank. 

China surely is not in penury to require money from such toll tax variety of 'sanctions' but would this be the norm for the much trumpeted one belt, one road (OBOR) project — countries on China’s periphery acquiesce to CPCs diktats or pay toll tax?

Obviously, China decided to "punish" Mongolia in this manner for entertaining the Dalai Lama since Mongolia is landlocked; sandwiched between Russia and China, besides Mongolia being largely dependent on China for transit. 

In addition, Russia has warmed up to China with the Obama administration having gone all out to ‘squeeze’ Russia in every possible manner, economic sanctions included. 

Mongolia sought India’s support against China’s obstructionist move, in the backdrop of such arbitrary Chinese action despite Mongolia always supporting China’s ‘One China’ policy. 

Mongolia till now was dependent on Russian transit rights but China’s imposition of the blockade-like situation will tax the Mongolian economy. 

India has said it is sympathetic to the problems being faced by Mongolia and will help them utilise the $1 billion financial assistance offered in 2015 during the visit of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to tide over the economic sanctions imposed by China.
As expected China’s Global Post went berserk frothing at the mouth, and in its typically jaundiced language warned Mongolia of dire consequences for seeking financial help from India, dubbing it "politically harebrained", adding, “Mongolia should be alerted that it cannot afford the risks of such geopolitical games." 

But why should be China so mortally scared of the Dalai Lama when she has succeeded in systematic destruction of the Tibetan-Buddhist culture of Tibet and settled seven million Han Chinese in Tibet overwhelming the Tibetans through demographic invasion. 

There is no insurgency in Tibet — quite opposite to Xinjiang. 

Tibetan self-immolators in China include teenagers, nuns and monks, majority in China's Sichuan province, especially around the Kirti Monastery in Ngawa City, Ngawa County, Sichuan, Labran Monastery in Xiahe, and some in Gnasu and Qinghai provinces, besides TAR.
In recent years, CCP’s policy has become harsher against Tibetan monasteries. 

Many Buddhist monasteries including Dron-na, Tarmoe and Rabten have been forced to shut down in Driru County, Kham Region of eastern Tibet in TAR, where monks have been forced to vacate — all under the garb of CCP's "patriotic re-education" campaign, even issuing orders for the Chinese flag to be put atop private homes. 

Some closed monasteries have been converted into prisons and as per reports filtering out despite total clampdown on media and communications in TAR, least details of the cultural genocide gets revealed. 

There is little chance of Tibetan rebellion overthrowing the Chinese regime in Tibet. 

So why be scared of the Dalai Lama who has never even talked of independent Tibet? 

On the other hand, if the west conspires to orchestrate an implosion of China, which may well happen in case the CPC’s aggression crosses western redlines, it is unlikely to centre on Tibet considering the multiple fault-lines that China has.
What China is mortally scared of is a group of any people getting together that may set them thinking in one direction; call it phobia of the CPC devolving around its own insecurity. 

That is why a simple exercising group like Falun Gong was banned in China. 

And that is why the atheists of CPC abhor any religion because religion implies gatherings at the place of worship, leave aside gatherings at religious ceremonies and other activities. 

That is why the clampdown on Buddhists in Tibet, beating of monks and Buddhists gathered to celebrate Dalai Lama’s birthday, and the genocide in Xinjiang. 

But China makes exceptions in portraying a benign face for religious tolerance where her strategic interests override CPC’s inherent phobias. 

Prominent example is China’s $3 billion investment in Nepal’s Lumbini project that would help China achieve its long-term strategic goal of bringing Nepal irrevocably under its influence. 

China has already expanded its railway to Shiatse (Xiagze), seat of Panchan Lama in 2014 in Tibet, which is some 450 kms from Kyirong. 

By 2020, China plans to extend this rail link to Kyirong which is a mere 26 kms from the Nepal border. 

Former Nepalese PM Oli during his visit to Beijing in March 2016 had requested China that the Chinese rail link be extended to cross the China-Nepal border. 

Nepal is also seeking China’s assistance in constructing a monorail in Kathmandu.
The China-Nepal rail line and the Lumbini project is the Nepalese version of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. 

China’s Confucius Institute in Kathmandu University, co-established by Hebei University of Economics and Business, with full support from Office of Chinese Language Council International is spearheading China’s soft power invasion. 

China is investing in hydropower and tourism development in Nepal. 

During 2015, Nepal endorsed FDI proposal worth $360 million by China to establish a cement plant in Nepal. 

This is over and above the numerous ongoing development projects and three star hotels in Kathmandu over past several years manned by PLA disguised as civilians. 

In recent years, hundreds of Buddhists in Kathmandu have been holding demonstrations to protest authorities stopping them from building a Gompa in the jungles of western Nepal. 

Ironically, Buddhists make up about 10 percent of the population in Nepal but yet are under severe restrictions because of China’s subjugation of Nepal.
Nepal, under Chinese pressure, stopped issuing refugee identity cards, leaving many Tibetans unable to get higher education or jobs. 

In recent years, Thinley Lama raising his voice for rights of 20,000 Tibetan refugees in Nepal was put behind bars. 

Anything Tibetan or Buddhist is anathema to China and the lives of Tibetan refugees in Nepal is turning into hell with Chinese pressure. 

China is going full hog to crush Tibetan activities in Nepal. 

Since 2010, Nepal commenced deportation of Tibetans crossing the border — handing them back to Chinese authorities. 

Nepalese authorities prohibit Tibetan residents from gathering in groups, whether to mark the birthday of the Dalai Lama or just to picnic.
China continues to occupy large parts of Mongolia calling it ‘Inner Mongolia’. 

In her dream of becoming a ‘Great Power’ on fast track, China’s behavior towards her neighbours can expected to be highly irrational and bullish, with the exception of Pakistan that has surrendered her sovereignty to China. 

It is only ethical for India to support Mongolia in every possible way including in fields of defence and security.

How to Stand Up to China? Mongolia’s Got a Playbook

Ulaanbaatar just welcomed the Dalai Lama, despite warnings from Beijing.
BY SERGEY RADCHENKO

The day before the Dalai Lama’s November 18 trip to Mongolia, Beijing issued a “strong demand” to its neighbor to cancel the visit of the “anti-Chinese separatist” or face (unstated) consequences. The Dalai Lama would be making his ninth visit to the sparsely populated nation of 3 million people, just to China’s north. 

Previous visits triggered retaliation from China, including the temporary closure of parts of the Sino-Mongolian border.
Just like in the past, Ulaanbaatar ignored the warnings. 

Befitting a nation where a majority of the population practices a form of Buddhism derived from Tibet, Mongolian officials described the visit as purely religious in nature. 

The Dalai Lama attracted crowds of thousands during his four-day trip. 

He visited monasteries, preached to admiring worshippers at a gigantic sports facility (built with Chinese aid), and made a star appearance at an international conference on “Buddhist science.”
But in a press conference, the Dalai Lama slammed China for interfering with his travels. 

He also announced that the next spiritual leader of Mongolia, the Jebtsundamba Khutuktu, considered the third most important lama, after the Dalai Lama and the Panchen Lama, has been born. 

That controversial move is likely to anger Beijing, which has long sparred with the Dalai Lama over the right to appoint Buddhist reincarnations. 

After the Dalai Lama left on Nov. 23, Beijing indefinitely postponed bilateral meetings between the two nations, casting doubts over Ulaanbaatar’s hopes to obtain badly needed soft loans and economic aid.
Xi Jinping has repeatedly spoke about the win-win nature of China’s rise. 

China’s outreach to its neighbors through its massive One Belt, One Road initiative promises regional economic growth, peace, and stability. 

And Beijing advertises equality and non-interference as hallmarks of its foreign policy: different, it says, from foreign policies of the old great powers. 

But Beijing’s efforts — and embarrassing inability — to force Mongolia’s compliance with its political demands expose a more sinister face of China’s "friendship".

The history of China’s relations with Mongolia shows that raw pressure and intimidation can backfire in unexpected ways. 

One particularly relevant example concerns Beijing’s efforts to sway Mongolia following the 1962 Sino-Indian conflict. 

In 1959, following the outbreak of an anti-Chinese rebellion in Tibet, the then 23-year-old Dalai Lama fled to India. 

Beijing never forgave him for leaving, nor forgave India for giving him refuge. 

Relations between Beijing and New Delhi, until then hailed as a shining example of peaceful coexistence, tanked. 

Border tensions escalated, and in October 1962, the two neighbors went to war in the Himalayas.
Although China won the battle, the real challenge was to persuade the world that the Indians were the bad guys — a matter complicated by the reality that Beijing attacked India, not the other way around. The task fell to the founding father of Chinese diplomacy, Zhou Enlai, who spent weeks explaining China’s take on the conflict to disconcerted regional players like Indonesia and Sri Lanka. 

In December 1962, Zhou attempted to convince the Mongolians to endorse the Chinese point of view. The records of his dramatic encounter with then Mongolian Prime Minister Yumjaagiin Tsedenbal have recently been declassified by the Mongolian Foreign Ministry, and are now accessible online. They make for sober reading.
Tsedenbal, who came to China to sign a border treaty and to ask for economic aid, seemed surprised when Zhou unexpectedly raised the subject of India. 

Zhou recounted the highlights of the Sino-Indian border confrontation, and condemned the Indians for selling out to U.S. imperialism and for pursuing anti-Chinese policies. 

Tsedenbal reacted by saying meekly that he was sorry that China and India had quarreled. 

“I don’t understand what you mean by being sorry about the Sino-Indian conflict,” Zhou pressed. 

It was a matter of black and white: China was right, India was wrong. 

There could not be neutrality in the question. 

But Tsedenbal would not budge, telling Zhou that quarreling with India over an uninhibited strip of land in the Himalayas would only force the Indians to turn to the West, and that would not help China’s cause. 

Zhou nearly lost it: his face “twisted in anger,” noted the record-taker.
After this inauspicious beginning, the talks rapidly went downhill. 

Tsedenbal asked Zhou to help resolve the problem of Chinese workers in Mongolia. 

These workers had become rebellious and were declaring strikes; would Beijing tell them to behave, and send more workers, which Mongolia badly needed? 

In response, Zhou connected the workers problem and Mongolia’s unwillingness to endorse China’s political positions.
The two continued to argue to the point that, according the Mongolian record, Zhou literally jumped from his chair in anger. 

“You don’t need to get angry,” Tsedenbal pleaded with Zhou, “just speak calmly.” 

Zhou accused the prime minister of trying to “lecture” him. 

The then Mongolian Ambassador to China, Dondogiin Tsevegmid, present at the meeting, recalled that the conversation became so heated that he thought the two men “would come to blows.”

After this unpleasant encounter — the last time the two men saw each other — relations between China and Mongolia worsened. 

China curbed economic aid, and by 1964 had pulled out its workers from the country. 

Mongolia turned to the Soviet Union for protection, and the Russians sent an army, which they did not completely withdraw until after the Soviet Union fell apart in 1991. 

Tsedenbal remained one of the bitterest critics of China. 

It was on his watch that the Dalai Lama first visited Mongolia, in June 1979.
What was behind Zhou’s embarrassingly ineffective performance? 

Yes, the Chinese Premier, generally known for his refinement and tact, was under pressure at home to comply with Mao Zedong’s radical leftist agenda. 

But his brutal effort to impose the Chinese viewpoint on a visiting leader — in this case a leader of a neighboring country, which, he knew all too well, depended on China’s largesse — had the opposite effect from what he probably intended. 

In the early 1960s, some in the Mongolian leadership advocated a softer line on China. 

But Beijing’s pressure made it politically impossible to defend closer ties with China: anyone doing so risked alienation as a sell-out and as an agent of Chinese influence.
The problem was that the leaders of the Chinese Communist Party could not tolerate opposing opinions. 

Mao had brutally crushed domestic dissent. 

He applied the same yardstick internationally: one was either with him or against him; there was no middle ground to accommodate cautious neutrality like Tsedenbal’s. 

At the surface, it was all about equality and non-interference. 

But just below, there was the expectation that others would kowtow to your demands, and anger and retribution when they refused.
Today’s China is vastly more powerful than China of the 1960s. 

But it is hardly more cognizant that bullying others into submission is not a useful method for winning friends, especially among neighboring countries, which are often suspicious of Beijing’s intentions. 

The Dalai Lama’s recent visit prompted soul-searching among Mongolian politicians, as the Vice Chairman of the Mongolian Parliament Tsend Nyamdorj, among others, publicly questioned the wisdom of taunting the dragon. 

But, like in the 1960s, Beijing’s heavy-handed threats make it politically difficult to defend closer ties with Beijing.
If China is ever to gain regional trust, it must convince others that its words about equality are more than just words, that it respects others’ right to dissenting opinions, and that it will not issue “strong demands” or apply an economic lever in an angry effort to force compliance. 

Zhou has long been a role model for Chinese diplomats. 

But they could learn a valuable lesson from the Dalai Lama. 

“The true hero,” he once said, “is one who conquers his own anger and hatred.”

Dalai Lama visits Mongolia

By AFP

The Dalai Lama. 

The Dalai Lama (R) takes part in ceremonies at the Gandantegchilen monastery in Ulan Bator, the capital of Mongolia, on November 19, 2016.

The Dalai Lama, left, speaks at the Janraiseg Temple of Gandantegchinlen monastery in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, Saturday, Nov. 19, 2016. The Dalai Lama has preached to thousands of supporters Saturday in Mongolia on a visit set to test the country’s ties with its aggressive neighbor, China. 

The Dalai Lama met with Buddhist worshippers Saturday during a four-day visit to Mongolia, despite Beijing’s strident demand that he be barred from entering the country.
China is “firmly opposed to the anti-China separatist activities by the Dalai Lama in any country, in any name, and in any capacity”, foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang told reporters Friday.
China further demanded that Mongolia “not allow the visit by the Dalai Lama and do not promote any facilitation for the separatist activities by the Dalai clique”.
Home to devout Buddhists but heavily dependent on trade with China, Mongolia has tried to avoid angering its giant neighbour, which views the Nobel Peace Prize winner as a devious separatist bent on breaking apart China.
But the spiritual leader has pressed more for Tibetan autonomy rather than outright independence.
Mongolia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Tsendiin Munkh-Orgil said Friday that the Dalai Lama’s visit had no connection with the government.
The exiled Tibetan spiritual leader arrived in the landlocked nation’s capital of Ulan Bator Friday and will stay until November 22.
At the airport he told reporters that Mongolia and Tibet have “a unique and ancient relationship” like that of a master and a student.
“I want Mongolians to use new-era education and scientific achievements in their life to develop their country while keeping their beautiful ethical traditions such as respecting elders and being humane to each other,” he said.
Hundreds of monks and worshippers waited hours on Saturday in biting, minus 20 C (minus 4 F) temperatures for a glimpse of the 81-year-old Tibetan, who is widely revered in the country, with many families keeping his picture in small household shrines.
Mongolian Buddhism is closely related to the Tibetan tradition.
Dolgoriin Lkhagva, a monk, told AFP he travelled 600 kilometres (370 miles) on icy roads so he could convey the Dalai Lama’s message to worshippers back home.
Russian Daritseren Luvsanova, 73, said she crossed the border and drove 12 hours to see him at Gandantegchilen monastery in Ulan Bator, where he was participating in Buddhist ceremonies.
After several hours the Dalai Lama came outside to greet and bless worshippers, many of them holding long silk bands in a traditional gesture of respect.
“Look at how many people wanted to see the Dalai Lama. Our desire will not be bothered by Chinese affairs,” 25-year-old monk Shinebayariin Luvsantseren told AFP.
Despite China’s demands that Ulan Bator refuse him, “Mongolia has shown it is a democratic and independent country that makes its own decision”, he added.
The monastery that organised the visit said it was purely religious and separate from political affairs.
The Dalai Lama’s last visit to the vast and sparsely-populated country came in 2011, in the midst of a wave of self-immolations by Tibetans in China angry about what they saw as religious repression and growing domination by the country’s majority Han ethnic group.

Dalai Lama to visit Mongolia

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

ULAANBAATAR -- The Dalai Lama will visit Mongolia this week, Buddhist leaders said Thursday.
Davaapurev, a monk at the Gandan monastery in the Mongolian capital, Ulaanbaatar, said the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader's four-day visit starting Friday is for purely religious purposes.
He is to receive an honorary degree, take part in religious observances and hold meetings with academics and representatives of the nation's youth, said Davaapurev, who is organizing the visit. 

No word was given on any meetings with political figures.
The visit is "separate from politics and for religious purposes only," Davaapurev said.
China, landlocked Mongolia's giant southern neighbor, accuses the head of Tibetan Buddhism of seeking independence for Tibet and routinely objects to his overseas travels. 

Beijing has in past used the Mongolian economy's heavy dependence on trade with China as leverage, cutting off rail links and disrupting air travel during a visit by the Dalai Lama in 2006.
Mongolian Buddhism is closely tied to Tibet's strain and traditionally reveres the Dalai Lama as a leading spiritual figure.
However, the abbot of the rival Ikh Khuree monastery, Sanjdorj Zandan, criticized the visit as interference in Mongolia's internal affairs and said it appeared the Dalai Lama planned to name the new head of Mongolian Buddhism. 

Davaapurev denied any such appointment would be made.
Tibetan Buddhist leaders are recognized as the reincarnations of their predecessors and their appointments can be major sources of controversy.
The Dalai Lama, who fled Tibet during an abortive uprising against Chinese rule in 1959, made the first of his eight visits to Mongolia in 1979, when the country was still under Communist rule.