主题：洞郎对峙初步结局：印度完胜 -- 种植园土
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/doklam-row-china-removes-road-building-equipment-from-face-off-site/articleshow/60262735.cms
Doklam row: China removes road-building equipment from face-off site
Indrani Bagchi
| TNN | Updated: Aug 29, 2017, 01:11 IST
.
Highlights
?MEA on Monday said that “expeditious disengagement of border personnel at the face-off site at Doklam was on-going.”
?In a second statement at the end of the day, MEA confirmed that both sides had moved out “under verification.”
Doklam row: China removes road-building equipment from face-off site
NEW DELHI: In a diplomatic victory, India and China have agreed to "disengage"+ from the stand-off in Doklam on Bhutanese territory.
.
.
After almost 10 weeks of sustained negotiations between top-level Indian and Chinese officials, the MEA on Monday said "expeditious disengagement of border personnel at the face-off site at Doklam has been agreed to and is on-going."
.
.
By the end of the day, as Indian troops withdrew from their post at Doka La, Chinese troops and their road-building equipment too were removed from the face-off site. The standoff has been on since June 16 when Indian troops physically stopped the PLA from building a road on Doklam plateau. In a second statement at the end of the day, MEA confirmed that both sides had moved out "under verification."
.
.
The negotiations were conducted at various levels — first, during the visit by NSA Ajit Doval to China in July, where he held discussions with his counterpart Yang Jiechi. Next, foreign secretary S Jaishankar led the diplomatic talks with the Chinese side, helped by India's ambassador to China Vijay Gokhale, who worked ceaselessly with the Chinese government over the last couple of months to achieve an outcome that would be acceptable to both sides.
.
.
The MEA spokesperson said that in numerous meetings between the Indian and Chinese officials in the past couple of months, India has been successful in conveying its "concerns and interests." "In recent weeks, India and China have maintained diplomatic communication in respect of the incident at Doklam. During these communications, we were able to express our views and convey our concerns and interests."
.
Post-disengagement, China will continue to patrol the region as it had done earlier, but there will be no road construction activity. The resolution comes ahead of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to China for the BRICS summit. It also comes before a crucial 19th party congress in China where Xi Jinping expects to be "cleared" for another five years and he will choose the core group of leaders who will rule China for the next five years.
.
.
The Indians went in with some demands:
.
That China should not change the ground realities unilaterally.
That China should respect the the 2012 understanding on tri-junctions.
.
This was detailed by external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj in parliament where she said, "Point 13 of the common understanding states that "The tri-junction boundary points between India, China and third countries will be finalised in consultation with the concerned countries." Since 2012, we have not held any discussion on the tri-junction with Bhutan. The Chinese action in the Doklam area is therefore of concern."
.
.
While China was breathing fire in the public domain, during the negotiations, sources said, India held the line that bilateral relations would be affected if China did not ensure "peace and tranquillity" on the border. This could happen only if there was a reversal to the status quo. The two sides only came to an understanding after continued conversations and a realisation in China that India would not move from the ground until they withdrew.
In addition, India also provided China with a face-saving exit. China's initial response on Monday morning was to confine itself to saying that only Indian troops had withdrawn from the site, and that they would continue to "maintain sovereignty"on the Dok
我被骂也是应该
喜欢看战狼背后多数十可爱的中国人。论坛上绝大多数骂的也是可爱的中国人。因为这事是憋屈。我昨天写过，我给我师弟几周前说莫迪想认怂，通过大使馆想找出双方体面撤兵的方法。当时，有人就提过外交部可以不分时间，不分场合与不分地点做任何妥协。当时只能挠挠头。随后师弟破口大骂，就是现在论坛多数人骂的，你到我们的地方打脸几个月想体面得撤离。这算什么事。这样的中国人才能在后面扛住变局，只在直中取，不在曲中求。不是快意恩仇，而是当断则断。
这里中间还有一件事与这次中印对峙有瓜葛。估计没有多少人联系到。既广电部要求英国学术媒体删除已故领导人在过去重要历史时期的有关文献。而些文献包括我提及的过去的让步与承诺的文件渊源。直接和今天西藏有关联的，公开的那批资料没有。
没必要为过去的所有事都涂脂抹粉，看后面这个国家一步步改变就成。
转一个自己刚刚的回复：
我个人判断是，这只是个开始，同时也是个标志！在东向针对美日同盟没有多大把握，或者在日本与美帝打拉锯战很划不来的情况下，战略目标或者主要经营方向正式转向东南亚-南亚一线！印度洋是世界的中心，英帝国靠印度和埃及得以成为日不落强权，并打赢两次世界大战，日本人也一心南进直到缅甸！台湾以东压力过大已没有多大施展空间，美帝口里的肉，想太平洋够大基本上是一厢情愿，反倒是从巴基斯坦到菲律宾这么广大的区域目前没有其它强权染指，只有一个外强中干的地头蛇印度，这么好的形式和资源，天予不取必遭后噬！慢慢用个几十年时间拔掉印毛，得到的将是世界的心脏！
印度精英应该好好读读中国的春秋战国历史典籍，灭国阶段一开始就无法停止，而且往往是强权周边的中等诸侯先亡！
早上忽然看到消息，印度人就撤了。
印军侵入毫无争议的我国领土长达70天，未受到任何惩罚，全身而退，扬长而去。
洗地文章无数，但，用我们老秦人的话来说，就是“你羞你先人哩“。
用元首参加完贝希特斯加登会议后评价英法领导人的话来说，就是这些领导人“都不是能打一场世界大战的货色”；用先总统蒋 公的话来说，就是“文白无能，丧权辱国”。
便有人说不打是顾全大局；请问什么是大局？如何顾全？似如今这般，这个大局你顾全了吗？
便有人说这次印军退去是不战而屈人之兵，竟有无耻文人说此番意义和价值“比朝鲜停战协定更大”、比“79年对越自卫反击战成功进行更大”云云……无耻，无耻，无耻！
便有人说是避免中印鹬蚌相争、美国渔人得利；你根本无法阻止别国得利与否，只需要努力使得己方收益大于他国得利即可，你要比较相对收益而不是绝对收益！做生意尚且要不忌人生财，夫庙算乎？仅比较绝对收益，则天下几无可做之事；美国几次对外用兵，中国算不算得利？俄国在乌克兰、叙利亚和西方死掐，中国算不算得利？既然中国得利，美俄为啥还要去做？盖其收益远大于中国；那么中国干点事干嘛要那么忌讳别人得益呢？说到底，自己不下场，隔岸观火（更何况这火是踏踏实实低烧在自己身上的），就是博不到最大的收益！如此谋大事而惜身，账房先生鼠目寸光，见小利而忘大利、忘大义，真不知其可也。
说到底，咱也不扯什么中印大战的蛋，咱就踏踏实实、干净利落地消灭正面入侵之敌，怎么就不行？放任当面入侵之敌扬长而去，羞先人哩。
核武器有约定不上青藏高原，我不太相信。
青藏高原地势高，从这里发射核武器可以更容易的发射。如果有约定，可能更多的是忌惮地形优势。
不过这应该都是过去式了。
这是又不民主了吧？
其实即使是回到中印，摩擦争端从59年就开始了，“独裁”的中国被印度“完胜”了大概3年，然后突然的62年“民主”了一下；越南实现统一后不久就开始找中国的不痛快，中国继续“独裁”当卢瑟，然后在79年又突然的“民主”了一下。
哈哈，在这个上面找民主独裁是找错了地方的。
当然，现在唯上、不敢决策畏首畏尾的现象是不好的。上级不给下级交代底线、更不做后盾，下级不敢发挥能动性，仅仅成为复杂层级中的一个“中继器”，这不好。军队不敢说，行政上很呵呵。
习也的确给人有点神话自己树立权威的意思，基层组织里也太有权威的因素，手里的权力不能变现也要玩玩人。
分明都是弱鸡。
挨个数一下：俄国算老牌列强，可是对不起，目前是我们的盟国；其他还有“强”敌吗？周边所有接壤国家加在一起，工业生产能力能比得上我大河北省么？
不接壤国家里，日韩算是强一些，可是韩国和我们为敌？先过了我金正恩大统领这关再说；必须承认日本比较难缠，可是一则国力远逊天朝，二则实力结构严重不平衡，三则半殖民地国家的基本性质，并不值得我们把它当做一个能对我们造成严重伤害的国家。好吧，日本算“强”敌，可是算来算去也就这一个“强”敌，何来的强敌环绕？
中国还是印度？
我虽然看不上印度，但是人家也没这么低格调，目标就是为了爽一把？
既然边防没有扎牢，亡羊补牢即可。印度人再坏，人家越境也没有打砸抢烧，你上去就给人家放血？
说到底就是个非法越境，这个是一枪爆头的罪名吗？
我说楼主怎么奇谈怪论，近乎语无伦次。