(12-13-2022, 10:31 AM)Ninurta Wrote:(12-13-2022, 09:36 AM)DISRAELI Wrote: I'm convinced that the Chinese are genuinely not interested in invading India as such, because India was never under Chinese control in the past. Their interest in east Asia is "getting back" any territory which used to be under Chinese control or influence (however remotely) in the old days. So Mongolia, east Siberia, Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, Tibet, yes. India, no. Getting absolute control of the mountain frontier with India is something they want for its own sake, not as a launching pad for an attack on the Ganges valley.
I can understand what you're saying, but isn't it a bit like saying that an attack on Kent doesn't count as an attack on England?
We have a somewhat similar situation in the US - a group called "La Raza" wants to take control of the western US for Mexico, because it was Spanish before we won part of it in the Mexican War and bought the rest. The areas you mention were indeed once under Chinese control, but that was under the old management, not the new management, so as far as I'm concerned, the CCP has no legitimate claim of any kind on any of it. The CCP never controlled it.
Borders come and borders go, lands are gained and lost in the march of time, and even entire nations dissolve and reform with new boundaries and new Overlords.
.
No, the Chinese are not attacking Kent. They're trying to control the English Channel. That's the closer analogy.
I'm not suggesting legitimacy of claim. I'm theorising about the psychology of wanting to claim. The occupation of Tibet showed the "recovery of suzerainty" psychology at work. As does the claim on Taiwan.