中国是否正在试图遏制印度？ [美国媒体]

Is China trying to contain India?

中国是否正在试图遏制印度？



I consistently hear from tons of Indians some sort of "India-containment program" that is being done by China, they call it the "string of pearls".

我经常听到很多印度人说中国正在实施某种“遏制印度计划”，他们称之为“珍珠链”。

Honestly the whole thing looks pretty much like Indian projections towards China, but I'd like to have your perspectives on this matter.

老实说，整体来看，事态的发展确实很像印度人对中国的预测那样，但我想听听你们对这个说法的看法。


maxedouthyperion
i guess the short and sweet version is india is a threat to china's goals of being the regional power. india dominating the indian ocean would threaten china's trading lanes and power projection lanes. if china wants to keep its foreign investments safe in the middle east and africa, it needs to keep the indian ocean open to their ships.
if china can control the south china sea and the indian ocean, then the south asian countries would automatically fall under china's sphere of influence. this goes against america's power projection strategies in asia, which is why the americans are against the base building in the south china sea. so its no surprise if india and america will work together to counter chinese influence in the region. america doesnt see india as a threat to american dominance yet because one there is always pakistan and bangladesh cards to play against india and also india is weak compared to china in terms of military and economy.
I dont know if china wants to "contain" india or whatever, but they are certainly doing what ever they can to further their own interests.

我觉得简短而合理的解释应该是印度被视为是中国成为区域性强国目标的威胁。印度主宰印度洋将威胁到中国的贸易通道和电力投射通道。如果中国想要在中东和非洲保持其外国投资的安全，它就需要保持印度洋对他们的船只开放。

如果中国能控制南海和印度洋，那么南亚国家就会自动落入中国的势力范围之内。这与美国在亚洲的实力投射战略背道而驰，这也是为什么美国人反对在南中国海建设基地的原因。因此，如果印度和美国合作对抗中国在该地区的影响力，也不足为奇。美国并不认为印度是对美国统治地位的威胁，因为有巴基斯坦和孟加拉国在和印度互相撕逼，并且印度在军事和经济方面也比中国弱。

我不知道中国是否想要“遏制”印度或什么的，但他们肯定会尽一切努力来促进他们自己的利益。

zangorn
Logistically speaking, what does it mean to control an ocean? Or put another way, what would happen to China's ships in the Indian Ocean, if they don't control it? Are we talking about access to dock at ports? Protection from pirates? Or would India forcefully block a Chinese ship?

从逻辑上讲，控制海洋意味着什么？换句话说，如果中国无法控制印度洋，那他们在印度洋上的船只会怎样？是失去了码头的通行权？还是遭受海盗袭击？还是印度会强行封锁一艘中国船只？

maxedouthyperion 
i think control in these terms is if india one day decides to cut the indian ocean trade routes to china, will china be able to easily break their blockade through pure naval force or would they have to use other means to solve the problem. so definitely ports all around the vicinity of the ocean would help tremendously in any naval war effort in the indian ocean.

我认为，如果印度有一天决定切断通往中国的印度洋贸易航线，那么中国是否能够通过纯粹的海军力量轻松地打破封锁，或用其他方法解决问题？因此，毫无疑问，海洋附近的港口对印度洋的任何海战的尝试都有很大的帮助。

loscrimmage
what size (number of boats) of navy is needed to cut ship traffic on Indian Ocean? Can't the trade ships just take the penalty and drive further away? What kind of area will India warships patrol? How can they realistically defend that ocean area? at what cost?
I tend to think all of these claims are not realistic when you have an open sea to navigate such as in the Indian Ocean. But I am happy to be proven wrong.

切断印度洋上的运输船只需要多大规模（数量）的海军？贸易船就不会接受教训然后绕得远一点儿吗？印度战舰将在哪一块地区巡逻？他们如何能切实保卫那个海域？代价又是什么？

我倾向于认为，当你在印度洋这样的公海航行时，所有这些说法（在印度洋切断航线）都是不现实的。但如果被证明是错的我会很高兴。

Ali_Safdari
Right.
It would only increase the cost of transportation. Sure, that's a problem, but it's no where near how threatening us armchair experts tend to make it out to be.

没错。
这只能增加对手的运输成本。当然，这也是个问题，但是对我们的威胁性远没有那些键盘专家想要证明的那么大。

jackisano
If India could cut off China from the Malacca strait, the Persian gulf, and the Red Sea, wouldn't that be enough to cripple the Indian ocean trade for them*?
*China

如果印度能切断中国与马六甲海峡、波斯湾和红海的联系，那这还不足以削弱中国在印度洋上的贸易吗？

sparky_sparky_boom
They've still got Africa, the Middle East, and Europe/America through Suez. Not pleasant, but not fatal.

他们（中国）仍然能通过苏伊士占领非洲、中东和欧美。所以切断印度洋航线虽然让他们不愉快，但不致命。

jackisano
How is that possible if the Red Sea and the Persian gulf are cut off?

但是如果红海和波斯湾都被切断了，那还怎么可能通过苏伊士？

sparky_sparky_boom 
India still has access to the Red Sea and Persian gulf, that's on the West side of the Indian Ocean. Malacca where the blockade point would be is on the East side.

印度仍然可以进入红海和波斯湾，它们在印度洋的西侧。而马六甲的封锁点在东边。

jackisano
India is the one doing the blockading in this scenario.

兄dei，我们讨论的是印度是实施封锁的一方的情形。

--------------------

rhinologic
Why would india do that? Why would they even attempt to do it knowing they can't? Why would they risk a population of billion people in order to cut off trade routes? What could they possibly hope to accomplish with this move.

印度为什么要这么做？他们为什么要在明知自己做不到的情况下尝试去做这件事呢？他们为什么要冒着十亿人口的风险来切断贸易路线？通过这一举动，他们能希望实现什么？

wwants
The question isn’t why, but what if. All militaries prepare for all eventualities. It isn’t just because you think somebody would want to cut your trade routes but you have to prepare for a future where they might. And protecting your power projection stops people from even thinking about challenging you. If you allow your power projection abilities to erode it changes your competitors calculations in how they deal with you.

问题不是“为什么”，而是“万一”发生了怎么办。所有的军队都是在为一切可能发生的事情做准备。这不仅仅是因为你认为有人会想要削减你的贸易路线，而是你必须为他们未来可能会做的事情做好准备。保护你的力量投射会让人们甚至不敢产生挑战你的念头。如果你允许你的投射能力被侵蚀，就会改变你的竞争对手对你的态度。

hiacbanks
Should the "why" question more important? Without defining "why" (intent), all these "what if" seems aimless

“为什么”不应该是更重要的吗？没有“为什么（意图）”那所有的“万一”看起来都是无所由来的。

wwants
“Why” is important to determine how likely a scenario is. “What if” enables you to prepare for all scenarios regardless of likelihood. You should apply more resources to deal with more likely scenarios, but you should still prepare for all scenarios regardless of likelihood.

“为什么”对于确定场景的可能性是非常重要的。“万一”则使你能够为所有场景做好准备，而不管可能性如何。你应该应用更多的资源来处理更可能的场景，但是无论可能性如何，您仍然应该为所有的场景做好准备。

----------------------------

sparky_sparky_boom
Here's a possible situation
China is allies with African Nation 1, India with Nation 2.
Nation 2 and 1 get into a war, China intervenes to protect the economic assets it has in its ally.
India blocks the Chinese navy from sailing to Africa to help out its own ally.
Chaos ensues.

这里有个可能的情况：
中国是某非洲国家A的盟友，印度是某非洲国家B的盟友。
当A和B陷入战争时，中国为了保护它在其盟友中的经济资产而介入。
然后印度阻止中国海军前往非洲帮助自己的盟友。
混乱因此产生。

maxedouthyperion
because india can emulate what china did in its 20 years of enormous growth. india now could be where china was a decade ago in terms of economic boom. assuming that india can get the same sucess china got in terms of growing the economy, then they would be competing for the same resources that china is trying to get. when they are in competition, there is potential for conflict. india may not be able to blockade the indian ocean now, but in 10-20 years, they may be able to. china is trying to prevent that possibility of that happening in the future. probably.

因为印度可以效仿中国20年来巨大的增长。就经济繁荣而言，印度现在可能是中国十年前的水平。假设印度能在经济增长方面取得同样的成功，那么他们就会争夺中国也想要的同一种资源。当他们处于竞争中时，就有可能发生冲突。印度现在可能无法封锁印度洋，但在10-20年后，他们可能能够这么做。中国正在努力防止这种可能性在未来发生。

Gerald_Shastri
Google Malacca dilemma. India can surely blockade the Malacca straits in case China decides to blockade the waters of Brahmaputra or try some Doklam-type needling in future. India's tri-services command at Andaman & Nicobar Islands just sits near the Malacca straits. India would keep that option open along with US, Japan, Australia, Singapore and Vietnam who are wary of China's military ambitions in SCS.

谷歌一下“马六甲困局”。印度当然可以封锁马六甲海峡，以防中国决定封锁雅鲁藏布江水域，或者在未来尝试背刺印度。印度安达曼和尼可巴群岛的三军指挥部就坐落在马六甲海峡附近。印度将和那些对中国在南海的军事野心持谨慎态度的国家比如：美国、日本、澳大利亚、新加坡和越南一道，保留这么做（封锁马六甲海峡）的可能性。

rhinologic
It would be suicide for no good reason.

这无异于自寻死路。

Gerald_Shastri
There are enough many reasons for India to hold a such a leverage over China. On leverage is arming Vietnam/Taiwan/Japan with nukes, as a kind favor for China's past largess.

印度有足够的理由对中国保持这样的杠杆作用。
杠杆就是用核武器武装越南/台湾/日本，以“报答”中国过去的“慷慨”。

johndouglas220
This is r/geopolitics, not r/moralpolitics.

这里是地缘政治讨论区，不是妄想政治讨论区，谢谢

----------------------------

2nd_class_citizen
india is weak compared to china in terms of military and economy.
I hear the statement a lot that India is militarily weaker than China. I won't deny the clear difference in GDP, infrastructure, and military assets on paper, but have to wonder what the PLA's real effectiveness would be in a large scale conflict, especially one far from China's borders. How many large scale conflicts has China fought in in the last 20 years? According to the wikipedia page, nothing of note. This is probably why analysts sometimes refer to China as a paper tiger. India on the other hand has fought live conflicts with Pakistan multiple times. So I'm not sure that military assets tell the whole story.

“在军事和经济方面，印度比中国弱。”

我经常听到这样的说法：印度在军事上比中国弱。我不会否认两国在GDP、基础设施和军事资产在纸面上的明显差异，但我很想想知道，在一场大规模的冲突中，解放军的真正实力有多强，尤其是在一个远离中国边界的冲突中。在过去的20年里，中国卷入过多少场大规模的冲突？根据维基百科的页面，没什么是值得注意的。这可能就是为什么分析人士有时把中国称为纸老虎的原因。另一方面，印度多次与巴基斯坦进行实战。所以我不确定军事资产能说明全部的情况。

hiacbanks 
war is expensive and last resort.

战争是昂贵的，也是最后的手段。

maxedouthyperion
totally correct. china's military experience is pretty bad and i doubt any of the current generals have ever been part of a large scale conflict. there is no way to tell if china's new growing military is efficient or capable. we have yet to see their military doctrines at work. but lots of paper weight is better than not i suppose.

完全正确。中国的军事经验相当糟糕，我怀疑他们目前的任何一位将军都没有参与过大规模的冲突。我们无法判断中国新的不断增长的军队是否是有效率或能力的。我们还没有看到他们的军事理论发挥作用。但我想很多纸上的实力总比没有好。

professorMaDLib
India hasn't had any real large scale conflict with Pakistan since 1999 (Kargil war), and that was a very limited scale engagement (estimated 30k vs 5k). Their last large scale conflict was in the indo pakistani war of 1971. There's been a lot of skirmishes on both sides but it has never really escalated and I'm not sure how much that would translated to an operational/strategic engagement between another major power.
I do concede that their troops probably have better combat experience although with inferior equipment.

自从1999年(卡吉尔战争)以来，印度从未与巴基斯坦发生过任何大规模的冲突，而且这场冲突的规模非常有限（大概3万对5千）。
他们最后一次大规模冲突是发生在1971年的印巴战争。现在双方都发生了许多小规模冲突，但从未真正升级过，我不确定这会转化为另一个大国之间的作战/战略接触。
我承认，尽管装备低劣，但他们的部队可能有更好的战斗经验。

gaiusmariusj
Why better combat exp?

为什么他们有更好的战斗经验？

-------------------------

Aerda_
Also, India is a democracy so there is no ideological hostility towards India that would justify treating India as a threat. Not to mention that a powerful India could act as a good balance against China in Central Asia and SE Asia, limiting China's influence.

此外，印度是一个民主国家，因此，没有任何意识形态上的敌视认为印度是一种威胁印度的理由。更不用说一个强大的印度能够在中亚和东南亚与中国之间取得良好的平衡，从而限制中国的影响力。

rhinologic
Why do people think the west prefers democracies or values democracy as a goal?

为什么人们都认为西方更喜欢民主，或者把民主作为一个目标？

hiacbanks
democracy
Can you elaborate why India's democracy is better than China's authoritarian style?

你能解释一下为什么印度的民主比中国的威权主义更好吗？

Gerald_Shastri
If authoritarian style is so good, why does Taiwan and Hong Kong maintain a semblance of democracy, along with most countries in Asia?

如果威权主义这么好，为何台湾和香港与亚洲大多数国家一样，都是民主的样子呢？

hiacbanks
I never conclude Chinese authoritarian style is so good. My ask is to compare Chinese authoritarian style with Indian’s democracy system, which you conveniently ignore.
If you intention is to win an argument, you can ignore my question.

我从来没有说过中国的威权主义是多么的好。我的问题是让你把中国的威权主义和被你轻而易举就忽视掉了的印度的民主制度进行比较。
如果你想赢得一场辩论，那你可以忽略我的问题。

Gerald_Shastri 
You cant compare apples with oranges. Case closed.

我的答案是你不能把苹果和橘子相提并论。完毕。

---------------------------

IndYeah777
Its not just limited to moves regarding Oceans.
Perhaps you are unaware of the history on this, but China has played a major role in Pakistan's acquisition of nuclear weapons. Reportedly to the extent that the first Pakistani nuclear test was carried out at Lop Nor in the 1980s.
Imagine a scenario where Taiwan claimed major territories along the Southern Chinese coast, and attacked China militarily multiple times in an attempt to get them. And imagine hypothetically, that India assisted Taiwan in acquiring nuclear weapons. How would the Chinese feel about such "tactical" moves?
Imagine if Taiwanese citizens were committing bombings and terrorist attacks in Chinese cities, while being supported by the government of Taiwan. And India intervened at the UN, to save those criminals from being sanctioned. This is what China is doing at the moment.
There is a big gap between the stated intent of the Chinese government, and their actual actions, when it comes to India. Calling it containment is actually being polite. The actions of the Chinese state can arguably be viewed as hostile. This is the primary reason for the distrust and frustrations on the Indian side.

（注：此楼回复的是最初的一楼）

它不仅限于海洋方面的行动。
也许你们不知道这方面的历史，但中国在巴基斯坦获得核武器方面发挥了重要作用。据称，巴基斯坦的第一次核试验是在1980年代在罗布泊进行的。

试想一下，台湾在中国南部沿海宣称拥有那里大部分的领土，并多次军事攻击中国，企图夺取这些领土。再想想，然后印度帮助台湾获得了核武器。中方对这种“战术”举措会有何感想？

试想一下，如果台湾公民在中国大陆城市进行轰炸和恐怖袭击，同时得到台湾政府的支持。然后印度在联合国进行了干预，以使这些罪犯免于被制裁。这是中国目前正在做的事情。

在印度问题上，中国政府的明面上的宣称与他们的实际行动之间存在很大差距。称之为遏制实际上已经是过于礼貌了。可以说，中国政府对印度的行为是“敌对”的。这是印度方面不信任中国和感到沮丧的主要原因。

maxedouthyperion
i dont gain from either side coming on top. you seem over emotional and over biased while providing some long shot IF taiwan as an argument. if you want sympathy for india or something go to r/india or r/politics. geopolitics is for those who want to learn about why countries do certain things and how they achieve certain goals.

我不站在任何一边。你看起来过于情绪化和偏执了，同时如果把台湾作为一个论据，这是一个不太合理的比喻。如果你想要同情印度或者其他什么的，就去找印度板块或政治板块吧。地缘政治板块是属于那些想了解为什么国家做某些事情以及它们如何实现某些目标的人的。

IndYeah777
Eh? Sympathy? My post was about providing an Indian perspective on OP's question of why the perception exists that China is trying to "contain" India.
Its perfectly rational for China to use existing opportunities i.e. Pakistan to do so. Its cost effective and works really well.

呃？同情？我的帖子是关于从印度的角度看待OP的问题，即为什么存在中国试图“遏制”印度的看法的。
利用现有的机会（即巴基斯坦），对中国来说完全是合情合理的。它的成本效益和工作做得真的很好。

johndouglas220 
You seem to be way too emotional and tinged with morality to see clearly.
Any reasonable analysis of the situation as well as usual Indian claims such as (OBOR is being used to contain India) would make the argument fall apart.

你看起来太情绪化和带着太多的道德色彩了，以至于蒙蔽了你的双眼。
对形势任何合理的分析只要让印度人像平常那样宣称比如：一带一路是用来控制印度的。都会使这一讨论失去意义。

IndYeah777
False straw man that. I didn't even mention OBOR, which has more to do with deploying excess Chinese infrastructure capacity as an investment into perpetuating the current manufacturing advantages. If anything, China is more upset about Indian refusals to join OBOR.

别自己立靶子自己打。我甚至没有提到OBOR，因为OBOR更多的是将中国过剩的基础设施产能作为一项投资，以延续目前的制造业优势。如果有什么是我想说的话，那就是中国对印度拒绝加入OBOR感到更加不安。

johndouglas220
What I meant was your first post basically is a long post saying China is a big evil red empire or what not, this isn't r/moralgeopolitics, this is r/geopolitics.
Examine the geopolitical side of things, usual Indian claims such as OBOR being used to "contain" India just don't stand up to scrutiny.

我的意思是你的第一帖基本上都是在论述中国是一个邪恶的红色帝国，这里不是妄想地缘政治板块，这是地缘政治板块。
从地缘政治的角度来看，印度经常声称OBOR是用来“遏制”印度的这一说法根本不值一驳。

Gerald_Shastri 
Chinese policy toward Pakistan is driven primarily by its interest in countering Indian power in the region and diverting Indian military force and strategic attention away from China. The China-Pakistan partnership serves both Chinese and Pakistani interests by presenting India with a potential two-front theatre in the event of war with either country.
Seventy percent of PakistanArmed Forces’aircraft and Main battle Tanks (MBT) were procured from China. China gave more than 400 military aircraft, 1600 MBT and more than 40 navy ships. Most of Pakistani missile projects are started by China
China helped Pakistan in the development of its nuclear programme also. According to a US intelligence agency report, China had transferred not only the nuclear weapons designs but also weapon grade uranium so that Pakistan can build two nuclear bombs
Then China blocking India from NSG membership, shielding India's move to designate a terrorist as a terrorist in UN, building a string of naval bases across Indian Oceans, sending Nuclear submarines for 'anti-piracy' missions etc are a case in point.

中国对巴基斯坦的政策，主要是因为中国有意在该地区对抗印度的势力，并转移印度的军事力量和战略注意力，使其远离中国。中国和巴基斯坦的合作关系符合中国和巴基斯坦的利益，在与两国发生战争的情况下，向印度展示了潜在的两条战线。

巴基斯坦武装部队的70%的飞机和主战坦克都是从中国采购的。中国向巴基斯坦提供了400多架军用飞机、1600多艘主战坦克和40多艘海军舰艇。巴基斯坦大部分导弹项目也是由中国启动的。

中国还帮助巴基斯坦发展其核计划。根据美国情报机构的一份报告，中国不仅转让了核武器设计，而且还转让了武器级铀，以便巴基斯坦能够制造两枚核弹。

接着，中国阻止印度加入核供应国集团，屏蔽印度在联合国指认恐怖分子为恐怖分子的行动，在印度洋各地建造一系列海军基地，派遣核潜艇或者“反海盗”任务等等都是中国遏制印度的一些很好的例子。

johndouglas220
Literally nothing you've said contradicts my main point, which is China is not trying to contain India.
Again, you are acting as if China is somehow 100% wrong and can't do what it is doing, which is quite rich coming from you because India gladly jumps on every anti-China coalition since the 70s, you don't get to claim victim status in geopolitics if you are doing, oh idk the EXACT SAME THING??
This is r/geopolitics, you are making it into r/moralgeopolitics, if China is "using" Pakistan, why is it that you are making such a big fuss when India does the same thing? That's pretty hypocritical of you.

从字面上讲，你所说的一切都与我的主要观点相矛盾，那就是中国并不试图遏制印度。
再一次，你表现得像是中国做什么都100%是错的，它什么也不能干，这种想法能很清晰地从你身上感受到，因为印度自70年代以来就乐于加入任何一个反中国的联盟，如果你在做着同样的事情（噢，我不知道是不是完全一样？？），你就不能声称自己是地缘政治中的受害者。
如果中国是在“利用”巴基斯坦，为什么你不会在印度做同样的事情时大惊小怪呢？你真虚伪。

Gerald_Shastri 
Hypocrites - that's what Communists call those who do not agree with them. That itself is the biggest hypocrisy.
Of course China has been trying to contain India. Take CPEC for instance, which was announced without consulting India and ignoring India’s core territorial sovereignty and security concerns. Or take China's determined rejection of Indian seat in UNSC & NSG. The problem is India wants a multipolar Asia but China is hung on about a unipolar Asia with China as the pre-eminent power using Pakistan to preoccupy & contain India on one side, while using NoKo to contain and preoccupy Japan & US, while it goes on about its expansionist dreams in SCS and elsewhere. India understands it and has started concentrating of creating its own circle of influence to counter China as and when required.

虚伪——这就是共产主义者对那些他们不同意的人的称呼。这本身就是最大的虚伪。
中国当然一直试图遏制印度。以CPEC（中巴经济走廊）为例，它是在没有征求印度意见的情况下宣布的，而忽视了印度的核心领土主权和安全问题。还有中国坚决拒绝印度在联合国安理会和核供应国集团的席位。问题是印度想要一个多极的亚洲，但中国却坚持以中国为中心的一个单极的亚洲，它在利用巴基斯坦来遏制和吸引印度方面注意力的同时，利用朝鲜来牵制和吸引日本和美国的注意力，同时它继续在南海和其他地方实现扩张主义梦想。印度现在已经明白了这一点，并已开始集中精力在必要时建立自己的影响力圈，以对抗中国。

----------------------------

verbosebro
You’re right. It’s not quite clear why India hasn’t retaliated against China the same way China did when it went on the offensive and armed Pakistan with nuclear weapons. As soon as Pakistan was armed with nuclear weapons it severely reduced Indian influence in the region. India should arm Taiwan with nuclear weapons, to show China their actions have consequences. China can’t really argue against this because it’s entirely a result of actions they took, what could their argument be? “I can punch you but you can’t punch me. We can severely reduce your influence but you can’t do it back.”
Now i’m sure China would say Taiwan is a different situation because they view it as a rogue province. At which point I think it’s fair to ask China, alright, but what is a appropriate response for India to take for such an extreme attack on Indian power and influence?


你说得对。现在还不清楚为什么当巴基斯坦发动进攻并装备核武器的时候印度没有学习中国的手段以其人之身还治其人之道。巴基斯坦一拥有核武器，就严重削弱了印度在该地区的影响力。印度应该用核武器武装台湾，向中国表明他们的行动是有后果的。中国无法真正反对这一点，因为这完全是他们所采取的行动的结果，他们有何怨可抱？“我可以打你，但你不能还手。我们可以大幅度降低你的影响力，但你不能这么干。”

现在我肯定中国大陆会说台湾是一个不同的情况，因为他们把台湾看作一个流氓省份。到那时，我认为应该问问中国：好吧，但是对于印度来说，对印度的力量和影响力进行如此极端的攻击，印度应该采取什么样的应对措施才公平呢？

Gerald_Shastri 
Indian Navy doesn't have as much adversaries or geographic constraints as the PLA Navy. It doesn't need that much assets to impose a blockade on PLA Navy on the Malacca straits. Moreover, It already co-ordinates with the Navies of Vietnam, Japan, US, Singapore, Australia and other regional navies and has access to their Naval depots, bases, intelligence, networks and satellites

印度海军没有中国海军那么多的敌人和地理限制。它不需要那么多的资产来对马六甲海峡的中国海军实施封锁。此外，它还与越南、日本、美国、新加坡、澳大利亚等国海军以及其他地区海军进行了协调，并能使用他们的海军仓库、基地、情报、网络和卫星。

-----（以上都是最初的一楼引申出来的讨论，以下是二楼）-----

throwawayedcba
It's imperative to define "containment," otherwise we're just going to have pointless rallies between pro-India users who point to a list of perceived encroachments and pro-China ones rejecting it for various reasons.

首先必须对“遏制”进行定义，否则我们将陷入亲印的人列举各种被侵害的事项以及亲中的人以各种理由来否定的漩涡之中。

johndouglas220
Containment would be like the US's mixed results with the containment of China.
Read my comment above to see about that, but honestly I don't see how China is trying to contain India.

这里的“遏制”就像美国对中国结果好坏参半的遏制。
我在前面陈述过这个观点，但老实说，我看不出来中国是如何试图遏制印度的。

dexiansheng 
I don't think it all that imperative. No one with a reasonable understanding of what containment is would maintain that China is trying to contain India.
What we're seeing is two regional powers sizing each other up. I take it that's the dynamic the OP really wants us to discuss.

我不认为这有什么必要。没有人能合理地解释什么是遏制措施，也不会有谁坚持认为中国正在试图遏制印度。
我们所看到的是两个地区大国在互相制衡。我认为两国的动作才是帖主真正想让我们讨论的东西。

throwawayedcba
It would help maintain a high level of discussion. The OP is a really good question because geographically, India sits precisely in between China and African and European markets, and I would hate to see this thread exhausted by the usual nationalist tirades.

我认为有必要，因为这将有助于保持高水平的讨论。帖主真的提出了一个很好的问题，因为从地理上来说，印度恰恰位于中国、非洲和欧洲市场之间，我不愿看到这条通道被不断冒出来的民族主义者的激烈言辞所拖累。

-----------------------------------

sparky_sparky_boom
Let's put it this way.
Suppose that India didn't exist, but because of voodoo magic/space aliens/glitch in our computer simulation there's an India-shaped piece of territory that bars anyone from entering. Everything else in the world is the same as before.
Would China still engage in their "string of pearls" strategy of building ports and facilities through out the Indian ocean, or would they behave differently?
Take the difference between what China would be expected to do if India didn't exist and what China is doing today, and that's how much of China's actions are influenced by India, containment or otherwise.
I lean towards the perspective that even if India didn't exist, China would still be building ports, moving military assets into the India ocean, and partnering with Pakistan to build a transport corridor simply because of how much of their economy's inputs come from Africa and the Middle East.

这么说吧。
假设印度不存在，但由于巫毒魔法/太空外星人/我们计算机模拟中的小故障，有一块长得跟印度似的的领土但禁止任何人进入。世界上其他一切按原来不变。

中国是否还会继续实施“珍珠链”战略，在印度洋外建造港口和设施？还是说会采取和现在不同的举措？
拿印度不存在中国会做什么和中国今天做什么这两者之间的区别来说，就能表明中国的行动在多大程度上受到印度、遏制印度或其他因素的影响。

我倾向于这样一种观点：即使印度不存在，中国也会建造港口，把军事资产转移到印度洋，并且与巴基斯坦合作建设一条运输走廊，仅仅是因为他们的经济收益有很多来自非洲和中东。

johndouglas220
This is the best comment here.
Indian's tend to have this honestly quite funny projection that every action China does in the IOR is meant to counter India, it isn't.
The funny thing is, if India had built those said ports and logistics facilities China wouldn't have to care about building the said ports.

这是本贴的最佳评论。
印度人往往会有这样一个非常有趣的预想，那就是中国在IOR（环印度洋地区合作联盟）中所做的每一个举动都是为了对抗印度，但事实并非如此。
有趣的是，如果印度自己有建造这些港口和物流设施，中国就不必关心这些港口的建设了。

IndoVArya
Indian's tend to have this honestly quite funny projection that every action China does in the IOR is meant to counter India, it isn't.
That's hilarious coming from the poster whingeing about "anti-China" coalitions conjured up by the U.S.
The Chinese tend to have this honestly quite funny projection and paranoia that any "coalition" or "co-operation" India or the US does in the Indo-Pacific is meant to counter China when it really isn't. The repeated bleating of "India joining a Quadrilateral to contain China" is just all so tiresome.
The funny thing is, if India had built those said ports and logistics facilities China wouldn't have to care about building the said ports.
You know what's more funny? It's funny that you think India is going to start building ports in Pakistan and it's funny that you think that Sri Lanka, a nation surrounded by water, doesn't already possess ports.
Get China to build ports in Taiwan.

“印度人往往会有这样一个非常有趣的预测，中国在IOR中所做的每一个举动都是为了对抗印度，但事实并非如此。”

呵呵，在天天抱怨美国在制造“反华”联盟的人嘴里说出这种话真好笑。
老实说，中国人往往会有这种非常有趣的预想和偏执，那就是认为印度或美国在印度-太平洋地区的任何“联盟”或“合作”都是为了对抗中国，然而并不是。“印度加入四方安全联盟是为了遏制中国”的反复叫嚣实在是太令人厌烦了。

“有趣的是，如果印度建造了这些港口和物流设施，中国就不必关心这些港口的建设了。”

你知道更有趣的是什么吗？有趣的是，你认为印度将会开始在巴基斯坦建造港口；有趣的是，你认为斯里兰卡——这个被水包围的国家，还没有拥有港口。
中国要建港口回台湾建去。

johndouglas220
Obviously triggered jingoist...
Oh sorry, you wanted me to sing praises of India? No, I'm not doing that just you can satisfy yourself.
The Chinese tend to have this honestly quite funny projection and paranoia that any "coalition" or "co-operation" India or the US does in the Indo-Pacific is meant to counter China when it really isn't. The repeated bleating of "India joining a Quadrilateral to contain China" is just all so tiresome.
I'm not Chinese, and the evidence that the US is actually trying to contain China with India's willing participation is far greater than alleged "Chinese" containment of India.
You know what's more funny? It's funny that you think India is going to start building ports in Pakistan and it's funny that you think that Sri Lanka, a nation surrounded by water, doesn't already possess ports.
Literally nothing you said invalidates anything I've said. India can build ports in Bangladesh perfectly fine, they can do so in Lanka as well. The fact that you managed to mentally contort China building a port in Sri Lanka into an actual containment of India is hilarious, you are LITERALLY PROVING MY POINT.

很明显引来了某些沙文主义者。
哦，对不起，你想让我歌颂印度？不，我不会这样做的，不过你可以满足自己。

“老实说，中国人往往会有这种非常有趣的预想和偏执，那就是认为印度或美国在印度-太平洋地区的任何“联盟”或“合作”都是为了对抗中国，然而并不是。“印度加入四方安全联盟是为了遏制中国”的反复叫嚣实在是太令人厌烦了。”
我不是中国人，而且有证据表明，美国实际上是在印度愿意参与的情况下遏制中国，这远远超过所谓的“中国”对印度的遏制。

“你知道更有趣的是什么吗？有趣的是，你认为印度将会开始在巴基斯坦建造港口；有趣的是，你认为斯里兰卡——这个被水包围的国家，还没有拥有港口。”
从字面上说，你说的一切都不足以反驳我所说的一切。印度可以在孟加拉国建造完全好的港口，他们也可以在斯里兰卡这样做。事实上，你设法把中国在斯里兰卡建造一个港口扭曲成了对印度的实际遏制，这是非常可笑的，你真是印证了我之前的观点。

--------------------------

thegreenfrog6111994
I wouldn't call it containment so much as India rejecting being a part of OBOR. The largest growth in the world is happening around the Indian Ocean (Africa + SE Asia) so it makes total sense that China is investing heavily in that area. It's just that India doesn't want to get roped into that sphere of influence.

我不太会把这称之为遏制，因为是印度自己拒绝成为OBOR的一部分的。
世界上最大的增长发生在印度洋周围(非洲、东南亚)，因此，中国在这一领域投入巨资是完全合理的。只不过是印度不想被束缚在这个势力范围内罢了。

RandomDeception
I do not see how joining some development initiative actually results in any lost sovereignty or reduced independence for India though, so I feel that particular reasoning is somewhat flawed.

我看不出加入一个发展倡议会导致印度失去主权或者减少独立性，因此，我认为这个特别的推理（中国遏制印度）存在一定的缺陷。

thegreenfrog6111994
Eastern Europe’s reliance on Russian oil is a power relationship that gives Russia leverage (though that reliance is waning now). If India owes money to China, if China spreads Beidou to India, or if Chinese companies hold large stakes in Indian companies, I would definitely see that as a security risk to India and as China increasing its sphere of influence in India. It’s why the US is finally starting to reject Chinese takeovers of American companies and is rejecting the entrance of Huawei into the US.

东欧对俄罗斯石油的依赖是一种权力关系，它赋予了俄罗斯影响力(虽然这种依赖正在减弱)。如果印度欠中国的债，如果中国把北斗卖给印度，或者中国公司持有印度公司的大量股份，以及随着中国在印度的势力范围的扩大。我肯定会认为这是对印度的安全威胁。这就是为什么美国终于开始拒绝中国对美国企业的收购，并拒绝华为进入美国市场。

---------------------------

johndouglas220 
Personally I view it as projection on the part of Indians to maintain this sort of "China is trying to contain us".
Most people who have any knowledge of what containment means and how it works would not agree with this statement, I personally don't believe so because China's actions would have to be interpreted in an extremely odd way to be seen as containment, usually the arguments consist of OBOR is being used to encircle India.
One good look at this would make the argument fall apart, ports aren't used to contain, military bases are. China has actually rebuffed Pakistani requests to install military bases, China has a ton of influence in Pakistan, it is in effect a satellite state of China, similar to Japan or South Korea w/respect to the US or Nepal/Bhutan in respect to India. This does not show any real Chinese intent to contain India as of now, if China really wanted to contain India. Now is the time to start doing it, there current actions don't seem to reflect this.
One would require a large degree of mental contortion and wishful thinking to seriously believe that economic competition is equivalent to containment, I would agree that China is seeking to economically shield its investments from Indian interference. But actual containment is a whole other league.
I'd expect to see if OBOR was used to "encircle" India for China to exclusively deal with other players like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan and Sri Lanka in terms of economics while excluding India. Like the TPP does with China, but India was actually invited to join OBOR, that's a direct contravention to this notion.
I'd expect to see military bases pop up, so far China has not done anything in this realm but it could happen in the future. China actually rebuffed Pakistani requests to build a military base, the news that China was building a military base was officially denied by the Chinese government so I really don't believe anything is happening as of now. This could change in the future, but as I said the time to contain India is right now (it's not a guarantee that India will take off, but countries will make decisions based on worst case scenario almost universally), considering that I think its unlikely that China will engage in this field in the future if the current trends hold.
So, I don't really see how China is containing India. Competing yes (actually its more like India trying to compete with China), but actual containment is a whole other league.
That being said, it's honestly incredibly hypocritical for Indians to even be mad about containment (which is alleged) when India jumps on pretty much every anti-China coalition like the USSR and the US led coalitions, it's pretty hypocritical for them to complain about alleged Chinese containment when they are obviously playing with the US to contain China. That's double standards to me. They usually use agitprop attacks against Chinese morality or chide China for somehow being an evil red empire to justify Chinese containment.

就我个人而言，我认为这是印度人的一种幻想，即维持这种“中国正在试图遏制我们”的猜想。
大多数了解遏制手段及其运作方式的人都不会同意这一说法，个人来说我也不相信，因为中国的行动将不得不以一种极其奇怪的方式来扭曲才会被视为是对印度的遏制，而通常使用的论点是“一带一路”是用来包围印度的。

只要稍微细微的观察就会使“（中国建造）港口不是用来吞吐容纳的，而是作为军事基地”的论点土崩瓦解。中国实际上拒绝了巴基斯坦——这个实际上类似于日本或韩国对美国的尊重或尼泊尔/不丹和印度的关系的卫星国——关于建立军事基地的请求。这显示出中国目前没有真正想要遏制印度，如果中国真的想遏制印度的话。现在是开始遏制印度的时机了，但中国目前的行动似乎没有反映出这一点。

一个人要是真的相信经济竞争等同于遏制，就需要大量的心理扭曲和一厢情愿的想法，不过我同意，中国正在寻求在经济上保护其投资不受印度的干涉。但这和事实上的遏制完全是两回事。

在中国将在经济方面完全与巴基斯坦、孟加拉国、尼泊尔、不丹和斯里兰卡等国打交道，而不包括印度时，我倒想看看一带一路到底是不是用来“包围”印度的。就像TPP和中国一样，但印度实际上被邀请加入OBOR，这直接违反了这一观点。

我倒希望看到中国军事基地的出现，虽然到目前为止，中国还没有在这个领域做任何事情，但这在未来有可能会发生。中国实际上拒绝了巴基斯坦建立军事基地的请求，中国政府正式否认了中国正在建设军事基地的消息，所以我真的不相信现在会有任何这种事情发生。这种情况将来可能会改变，但正如我所说的，遏制印度的时机现在就到了(这并不是说印度要起飞了，要崛起了，只是各国都会根据最坏的情况做出决定而已)，鉴于此，我认为，如果按目前的趋势发展下去，中国今后也不太可能着手做这件事。

所以，我真的没看到中国怎么去遏制印度。竞争是存在的(实际上更像是印度试图与中国竞争)，但实际的遏制是另一回事。

话虽如此，当印度一边加入几乎所有的反华联盟，比如苏联和美国领导的联盟，一边却对中国的遏制（这是被指控的）怒不可遏时，真是难以置信的虚伪。当他们显然是在与美国玩遏制中国的游戏时，抱怨中国所谓的遏制是相当虚伪的。他们通常用煽动手段攻击中国人的道德或谴责中国，把中国作为一个邪恶的红色帝国来证明他们对中国的遏制是正当的。对我来说这是一种双重标准。