前印度駐中國大使:為了從地面上獲得少量戰術上的利益，中國在戰略上失去了印度_風聞

(轉自超大nousername)

https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/interview/for-minor-tactical-gains-on-the-ground-china-has-strategically-lost-india-says-former-indian-ambassador-to-china/article31884054.ece

谷歌翻譯的，湊合着看吧。安娜·克里希南（Ananth Krishnan）2020年6月21日22:43 IST更新

喬達姆·班巴瓦勒（Gautam Bambawale）是印度外交官，前印度駐華大使喬達姆·班巴瓦勒（Gautam Bambawale）是印度外交官，前印度駐華大使| 圖片來源：Jignesh MistryGautam Bambawale説，北京試圖通過控制領土來單方面定義LAC前印度大使戈塔姆·班巴瓦勒（Gautam Bambawale）説，6月15日在加爾萬河谷發生的衝突使20名印度士兵遭受了自1967年以來最嚴重的暴力衝突，這已經離開了由印中兩國精心建造以維持和平的整個邊界建築。到中國和巴基斯坦。印度與中國的關係已經到了一個轉折點，這將需要從根本上重新評估其對華政策。

編輯摘錄：經過多年的關係工作，您是否曾期待6月15日會發生什麼？我沒想到會發生這種事情。我之所以沒想到會發生這種事情，是因為自1993年印度和中國簽署《邊境和平與寧靜協定》（BPTA）以來，隨後又達成了許多協定，我們已經確定宗旨，某些操作程序，旨在維護邊界的和平與安寧。不幸的是，整個體系結構已經崩潰，現在已經成為歷史堆。如果所有這些有助於維持和平的協定都瓦解了，那將使我們前進到哪裏呢？兩國都同意，我們對實際控制線（LAC）所在的觀點存在分歧。因此，重要的是要確保和平與安寧。現在，這次，中國人民解放軍（PLA）所做的就是將自己的地面位置朝着他們認為是LAC的方向發展。通過這樣做，他們試圖單方面定義LAC。現在，部隊的移動使您的地面位置朝着您對LAC的構想轉變，我認為這是現狀的重大變化，中國人湧入了大批部隊，將他們向前推進，建有堤防，炮位，observation望塔。印度的底線必須是並且將要恢復原狀。印度有哪些現實選擇？首先，為了解決實地發生的事情，我們必須採取非常強硬的軍事姿態，這就是我們要做的。還必須有交談的空間。毫無疑問，當兩個民族不同意邊界時，只能通過相互討論來做到，而不能像中國人試圖那樣單方面做到。我們應該在外交和其他各級進行討論，以努力推進拉丁美洲和加勒比地區的地位並達成某種協議，我同意這是困難的，但必須達成。就更廣泛的關係而言，由於這些原因-一，中國人從根本上違反了我們維護和平與安寧的所有協定；第二，他們試圖單方面定義LAC；還有三個 經過數十年的鴻溝，雙方的生命都已經喪失了這一事實-我認為這是印中關係的拐點。我的建議是，印度作為一個國家和人民，當然包括牽頭的政府，必須從根本上重新評估其對華政策，做出改變，然後儘早實施。

​自1988年以來，模型一直是將差異與貿易等其他領域區分開來。那會改變嗎？不可能像以前那樣做生意。我提出的一個建議是，我堅信必須將中國公司排除在印度的5G試驗和推廣之外。那是口袋裏會受傷的地方。我認為這絕對是我向政府提出的建議。最後，由印度政府決定新政策的方案。我不主張徹底休息。正常的貿易和投資可以繼續。但是在5G問題上，做出決定非常重要。印度對該地區的態度會改變嗎？有一些中國觀察家説，今年在印度邊界上造成塵埃落定的可能原因之一是向印度表示要遠離美國和其他民主國家。實際上，我認為實際結果將完全相反。對於印度來説，非常重要的是共同努力，加強與世界民主國家的夥伴關係，包括與韓國，日本，印度尼西亞以及西方國家以外的其他國家。我相信這將會發生。正如一些中國觀察家提到的那樣，如果中國人期望邊界上的塵土飛揚是對這方面的一種警告，我認為這是完全相反的。

一些中國觀察家將最近的事態發展與北京對印度最近在拉達克的基礎設施建設構成威脅的擔憂聯繫在一起，並將其與第370條的稀釋聯繫在一起。這是否合理？這是合理的。我的問題是，當前的局勢是否需要達到目前的水平？在其他情況下，包括在Doklam，Chumar和Depsang，我們也已經做出了和平的解決方案。這次它已經超過了極限。我同意印度政府權威人士的一些評論，認為這是一個有預謀和深思熟慮的行動。我看不出中國有什麼收穫，因為我認為從戰略上來説，他們已經從戰略上失去了印度。

我不知道那是否是他們計算過的。我相信，如果有這種焦慮，本來可以在桌子上討論並談論，甚至在兩個軍隊之間，甚至可以討論道路建設。這使我認為解放軍今年夏天的這一特殊行動純粹是他們試圖實際控制自己認為是自己的領土的事情。這是有預謀的。它純粹與領土有關，但其含義既有戰術意義，也有戰略意義。我們是否正在尋找可能與1988年一樣重要的關係拐點，這標誌着關係正常化？我相信是。我不再為印度政府講話或工作，所以我説這是一個對這種關係有一定了解的普通印度公民。我相信印度將加強與世界民主國家的夥伴關係。從長遠來看，我的看法是，印度相對於中國擁有截然相反的價值觀，以及我們與世界其他民主國家共享的價值觀，這些價值觀將自我確立並決定印度的立場。恐怕印中關係不僅會惡化，還會進一步惡化。

INTERVIEWFor minor tactical gains on the ground, China has strategically lost India, says former Indian Ambassador to ChinaAnanth KrishnanJUNE 21, 2020 22:43 ISTUPDATED: JUNE 21, 2020 23:04 ISTSHARE ARTICLE 0PRINTA A AGautam Bambawale, was an Indian diplomat and the former Indian Ambassador to ChinaGautam Bambawale, was an Indian diplomat and the former Indian Ambassador to China   | Photo Credit: Jignesh MistryBeijing’s has tried to unilaterally define LAC by taking control of territory, says Gautam BambawaleThe June 15 clash at Galwan Valley, which claimed 20 Indian soldiers in the worst violence since 1967, has left the entire border architecture, carefully built by India and China to maintain peace, in the heap of history, says Gautam Bambawale, former Indian Ambassador to China and Pakistan. India’s relations with China have reached a inflection point that will require a fundamental reassessment of its China policy. Edited excerpts:Having worked on the relationship over so many years, did you ever expect what happened on June 15?I never expected such a thing to happen. And the reason why I didn’t expect such a thing to happen is because ever since 1993, when India and China signed the Border Peace and Tranquillity Agreement (BPTA), and there have been many agreements following that, we have put in place certain tenets, certain operating procedures, which were aimed at maintaining peace and tranquillity on the border. Unfortunately that entire architecture has collapsed, and is now in the heap of history.If all these agreements that have helped keep the peace have collapsed, where does that leave us going forward?Both countries have agreed that there are differences in our opinion of where the line of actual control (LAC) lies. Therefore, it was important to ensure that peace and tranquillity is maintained. Now, this time, what the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has done is that they have moved their ground positions towards what they believe is their LAC. And by doing so, they have tried to unilaterally define the LAC. Now, the movement of troops, to move your ground positions towards what is your conception of the LAC, in my opinion is a major change in the status quo, where the Chinese have come in with large numbers of troops, have moved them right forward, have built embankments, gun placements, observation towers. India’s bottom line has to be, and will be, restoration of the status quo ante.What realistic options does India have?First, to address what is happening on the ground, we have to have a very strong military posture, which we do. There must also be room for talks. There is no doubt that when two nation states disagree about the boundary, it can only be done through discussions with each other, it cannot be done unilaterally as the Chinese are attempting to do. We should have discussions at the diplomatic and other levels to try to move ahead on where the LAC lies and come to some kind of agreement which is difficult, I agree, but which has to take place. As far as the broader relationship is concerned, because of these reasons — one, that the Chinese have fundamentally violated all our agreements on the maintenance of peace and tranquillity; two, they are trying to unilaterally define the LAC; and three, the fact that lives have been lost on both sides after a gap of many decades — I think this is an inflection point in India-China relations. What I would recommend is that India as a country, as a people, including, of course, the government in the lead, must make a fundamental reassessment of its China policy, make changes in it, and then implement it at the earliest.ADVERTISINGAds by TeadsSince 1988, the model has been to separate differences from other areas such as trade. Will that change?It cannot be business as it was earlier. One suggestion that I have made is that I firmly believe that Chinese firms must be kept out of the 5G trials and roll-out in India. That is where it will hurt in the pocket. I think that is a suggestion that I would definitely make to the government. Finally it is for the Government of India to decide what is the package of a new policy. I am not advocating a complete break. Normal trade and investment can continue. But on the 5G question, it is very important to take the decision.Will India’s approach to the region change?There have been some Chinese observers who have said one of the possible reasons for this dust-up on the border with India this year is to indicate to India to stay away from the United States and other democracies. In fact, I think the actual result is going to be exactly the opposite. It will be very important for India to work together, strengthen its partnerships with democracies across the world, including with countries like South Korea, Japan, Indonesia, and others apart from Western nations.This is what I believe is going to happen. If the Chinese were expecting this dust-up on the border to be a kind of warning on that front, as some Chinese observers have mentioned, I think it is going in exactly the opposite direction.Some Chinese observers have linked recent developments to Beijing’s concerns about India’s recent infrastructure building in Ladakh that they see as threatening, and to the dilution of Article 370. Is this plausible?It is plausible. My question is, need the current situation have gone to the levels that it did? There have been other situations where we have managed and done a peaceful kind of resolution, including at Doklam, Chumar and Depsang. This time it has crossed the limits. I agree with some of the comments made by authoritative sources in the Government of India, that this is a premeditated and well-thought-out action. I do not see what gain China has had, because for some minor tactical gain on the ground, I believe they have strategically lost India. I don’t know if that is something they had calculated or not. I believe if there are these kinds of anxieties they could have been discussed over the table and spoken about, even between the two militaries, even the road building could be discussed. This leads me to think this particular action by the PLA this summer is purely something where they are trying to actually control territory which they believe in their conception is theirs. This is something which is premeditated. It is purely to do with territory, but its implications are both tactical as well as strategic.Are we looking at an inflection point in the relationship that could be as significant as 1988, which marked the normalisation of ties?I believe that it is. I no longer speak or work for the Government of India, so I say this as an ordinary Indian citizen who has some knowledge about this relationship. I believe that India will strengthen its partnerships with the democracies of the world. In the long term, the way I look at it is that the diametrically opposite values that India holds vis-à-vis China, and the values which we share with other democracies across the world, are going to assert themselves and are going to dictate India’s position. I am afraid that the India-China relationship has not merely deteriorated, but will deteriorate further.

有英語能力的還是看英文吧.