前印度驻中国大使:为了从地面上获得少量战术上的利益，中国在战略上失去了印度_风闻

(转自超大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

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

乔达姆·班巴瓦勒（Gautam Bambawale）是印度外交官，前印度驻华大使乔达姆·班巴瓦勒（Gautam Bambawale）是印度外交官，前印度驻华大使| 图片来源：Jignesh MistryGautam Bambawale说，北京试图通过控制领土来单方面定义LAC前印度大使戈塔姆·班巴瓦勒（Gautam Bambawale）说，6月15日在加尔万河谷发生的冲突使20名印度士兵遭受了自1967年以来最严重的暴力冲突，这已经离开了由印中两国精心建造以维持和平的整个边界建筑。到中国和巴基斯坦。印度与中国的关系已经到了一个转折点，这将需要从根本上重新评估其对华政策。

编辑摘录：经过多年的关系工作，您是否曾期待6月15日会发生什么？我没想到会发生这种事情。我之所以没想到会发生这种事情，是因为自1993年印度和中国签署《边境和平与宁静协定》（BPTA）以来，随后又达成了许多协定，我们已经确定宗旨，某些操作程序，旨在维护边界的和平与安宁。不幸的是，整个体系结构已经崩溃，现在已经成为历史堆。如果所有这些有助于维持和平的协定都瓦解了，那将使我们前进到哪里呢？两国都同意，我们对实际控制线（LAC）所在的观点存在分歧。因此，重要的是要确保和平与安宁。现在，这次，中国人民解放军（PLA）所做的就是将自己的地面位置朝着他们认为是LAC的方向发展。通过这样做，他们试图单方面定义LAC。现在，部队的移动使您的地面位置朝着您对LAC的构想转变，我认为这是现状的重大变化，中国人涌入了大批部队，将他们向前推进，建有堤防，炮位，observation望塔。印度的底线必须是并且将要恢复原状。印度有哪些现实选择？首先，为了解决实地发生的事情，我们必须采取非常强硬的军事姿态，这就是我们要做的。还必须有交谈的空间。毫无疑问，当两个民族不同意边界时，只能通过相互讨论来做到，而不能像中国人试图那样单方面做到。我们应该在外交和其他各级进行讨论，以努力推进拉丁美洲和加勒比地区的地位并达成某种协议，我同意这是困难的，但必须达成。就更广泛的关系而言，由于这些原因-一，中国人从根本上违反了我们维护和平与安宁的所有协定；第二，他们试图单方面定义LAC；还有三个 经过数十年的鸿沟，双方的生命都已经丧失了这一事实-我认为这是印中关系的拐点。我的建议是，印度作为一个国家和人民，当然包括牵头的政府，必须从根本上重新评估其对华政策，做出改变，然后尽早实施。

​自1988年以来，模型一直是将差异与贸易等其他领域区分开来。那会改变吗？不可能像以前那样做生意。我提出的一个建议是，我坚信必须将中国公司排除在印度的5G试验和推广之外。那是口袋里会受伤的地方。我认为这绝对是我向政府提出的建议。最后，由印度政府决定新政策的方案。我不主张彻底休息。正常的贸易和投资可以继续。但是在5G问题上，做出决定非常重要。印度对该地区的态度会改变吗？有一些中国观察家说，今年在印度边界上造成尘埃落定的可能原因之一是向印度表示要远离美国和其他民主国家。实际上，我认为实际结果将完全相反。对于印度来说，非常重要的是共同努力，加强与世界民主国家的伙伴关系，包括与韩国，日本，印度尼西亚以及西方国家以外的其他国家。我相信这将会发生。正如一些中国观察家提到的那样，如果中国人期望边界上的尘土飞扬是对这方面的一种警告，我认为这是完全相反的。

一些中国观察家将最近的事态发展与北京对印度最近在拉达克的基础设施建设构成威胁的担忧联系在一起，并将其与第370条的稀释联系在一起。这是否合理？这是合理的。我的问题是，当前的局势是否需要达到目前的水平？在其他情况下，包括在Doklam，Chumar和Depsang，我们也已经做出了和平的解决方案。这次它已经超过了极限。我同意印度政府权威人士的一些评论，认为这是一个有预谋和深思熟虑的行动。我看不出中国有什么收获，因为我认为从战略上来说，他们已经从战略上失去了印度。

我不知道那是否是他们计算过的。我相信，如果有这种焦虑，本来可以在桌子上讨论并谈论，甚至在两个军队之间，甚至可以讨论道路建设。这使我认为解放军今年夏天的这一特殊行动纯粹是他们试图实际控制自己认为是自己的领土的事情。这是有预谋的。它纯粹与领土有关，但其含义既有战术意义，也有战略意义。我们是否正在寻找可能与1988年一样重要的关系拐点，这标志着关系正常化？我相信是。我不再为印度政府讲话或工作，所以我说这是一个对这种关系有一定了解的普通印度公民。我相信印度将加强与世界民主国家的伙伴关系。从长远来看，我的看法是，印度相对于中国拥有截然相反的价值观，以及我们与世界其他民主国家共享的价值观，这些价值观将自我确立并决定印度的立场。恐怕印中关系不仅会恶化，还会进一步恶化。

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.

有英语能力的还是看英文吧.