Beijing, New Delhi poised for closer ties - China daily

[StarCraft_ZT]

The thing is, we are already investing massively in all those regions you mentioned, due to our shift away from domestic-investment led growth. To the point where people are talking about Chinese "neocolonialism", that's how much we are investing.

But our surpluses are so enormous that it cannot be absorbed, we are even resorting to buying "land" in places like Ireland and Ukraine, and water infrastructure in Britain.

The only reason India did not receive much, is because their Congress regime opposed all Chinese investment due to their political stance.

But Modi is much more pro-Chinese investment.

We can sit back, and let the USA + EU + Japan take all the lucrative infrastructure projects in India (since India's own government has destroyed their own fiscal situation and cannot afford it)... or we could seek those profits ourselves.

Which also strengthens the BRICS, and thus causes more heart attacks for the American dreamers that plan of upholding their global hegemony.

China should capitalize on the emerging markets, like India and Africa where infra-construction is massively needed, and developed countries, like the U.S. where the old infrastructure is so much depreciated that upgrade is needed.

 

[bolo]

Frankly as a new member and common Chinese civilian here,I am really deeply influenced passively by comments in this forum between China and India.In my view ,though we had border dispute,we don't loathe Indians and we like to discuss Indian things.My mother very much likes Indian film,TV series and yoga.I have a lot of customers from Indian and they are very friendly and honest.We treat each other equally and friendly.
I just hope both government should try to deal with those historical issues peacefully soon.Bring cooperation and development to our civilians.
China is a big country but hegemonic country because of our culture and education.Some persons try to propagandize "threat of China" because of communism and jealousy.This world is not zero-and-sum game and should be era of cooperation and development.
Hope members here could say something more positive and constructive.Hatred would evolve into war sooner or later.Don't pass it on generation by generation if we could face the history justly.

The problem is you cannot truly judge the whole situation by personal experience. On a macro level, national interest trumps all experiences from a personal level.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

I'll agree with you that the mulit polar new world does not need to include India as I think that once they become powerful as China is at present, they can potentially cause instability for the world.

As it stands right now, Russia and China is a good partnership. (see my post below). I was just a little too over zealous thinking China would be better off with the US in my previous post. @Chinese_Dragon prefer business with any country, I disagree with him. My post #65 address this.

He forgot to mention that China does business with US and Japan because in the early economic development of China, US and Japan had invested sizable $$ into China's economy. The business right now is due to convenience and the US has too much money invested in China to just pull the plug.

China should take this as a lesson and not try to push for develpment in India. Half the world are still poor, Africa is still not developed yet . I rather China develp Africa than India.

OK I agree with this post.

There is a small possibility that India could end up posing a threat to us after 20-30 years, though again our Tibetan Plateau means that any ground invasion of China from the West is geographically impossible, not even the Soviet Red Army could achieve such a thing given the terrain.

Africa is already saturated with Chinese investment, so is every other place in the world, starting with China itself which already has around 50% of the GDP made up of domestic investment.

Even Western nations like Britain have their infrastructure owned by China, Hell just recently we bought the biggest food producers in Israel.

India is not because they have rejected previous Chinese investment for political reasons.

But why should we let America + EU + Japan get rich off the growing Indian infrastructure sector, when we have by FAR the most experience in building infrastructure in the developing world.

Regardless, the Chinese government has been investing in Indian infrastructure already for many years now (check the articles dating back to the early 2000's), the difference with the Modi government will be the scale.

I don't believe that countries like India will ever side with us against America, but as long as they remain neutral and refuse to become an American vassal, that is already a huge blow to American hegemony.

 

[bolo]

OK I agree with this post.

There is a small possibility that India could end up posing a threat to us after 20-30 years, though again our Tibetan Plateau means that any ground invasion of China from the West is geographically impossible, not even the Soviet Red Army could achieve such a thing given the terrain.

Africa is already saturated with Chinese investment, so is every other place in the world, starting with China itself which already has around 50% of the GDP made up of domestic investment.

Even Western nations like Britain have their infrastructure owned by China, Hell just recently we bought the biggest food producers in Israel.

India is not because they have rejected previous Chinese investment for political reasons.

But why should we let America + EU + Japan get rich off the growing Indian infrastructure sector, when we have by FAR the most experience in building infrastructure in the developing world.

Regardless, the Chinese government has been investing in Indian infrastructure already for many years now (check the articles dating back to the early 2000's), the difference with the Modi government will be the scale.

I don't believe that countries like India will ever side with us against America, but as long as they remain neutral and refuse to become an American vassal, that is already a huge blow to American hegemony.

I do not see western gov't being too enthusiastic to invest in India. If they do, it will definitely cost more and it comes with political strings attached.

At the same time, it's beneficial to China. Let them overpay for projects and let them worry about western political strings attached to the projects. It keeps them poor and gives China the edge without doing anything.

Even though the border has the high plateaus, but that is what fighters and missiles are for. Look at the present situation. We know that the US cannot impose any economic sanctions against China because it will hurt them, especially their multinational corporations in China. Corporations are unpatriotic and will sell state secrets if they could for profits. Having tasted the 100 years humiliation, why put China in such risk again. It may not happen until 40-50 years but I sure do not want my grandchildren to have to face a formidable opponent due to this generations greed and lack of hindsight.

 

[SrNair]

ok, i may have been a little zealous with [becoming friendlier with US, i admit]. The whole point is this. US and other developed invested a lot of FDI in the early 80s to "prop up China". they were thinking the same thing that Chinese are thinking about India now, a potential huge market with 1 billion people. 30 years later, US want to pivot Asia but find it hard to do as China is no longer the weakling like the 80s. US is losing its dominant.

Could the US foresee a developed China so quickly, and did they foresee China will be a challenge to their hegemon? China want to do th same thing now in India. Your argument is, China does not want to be a hegemon or Indians not as smart as Chinese to build up in 30 years, or China will be much stronger in 30 years. The point being, the US could have an easier time containing China in the 80s then now. With development, India will be stronger and can close the gap with China. Chinese may be peaceful, do you think a strong India will be? Ask Bangladesh and Pakistanis.

Throughout the ages countless Chinese emperors have made this error. The thinking they are superior to the rest of the world and need not to expand or build colonies. Even to the point of having blue prints of the latest weapons, military vessels, etc written in a set of encyclopedias for all to see, LOL. After Qing, China was lucky to be intact given the military tech gap btw west and China. Wait until India has MIRV nuclear arsenal, you will see their true colours

We already have long range ICBM .But we dont use that for threaten this world.
You cant tolerate the interfering of phillipines or Japan in to your national security.
Here same goes to Pakistan and BD.We cant tolerate that.You cant claim other land because that was a part of your ancient kingdom.If you have Qing empire.we also had Mauryan empire stretching from Iran to Assam ,and Kerala to Tajikistan.But that is a history.How can we ask that places in current modern world?.Our ancient King Kanishka also had some parts of present China.So we cant create present modern world with that ancient history.You must change that emotion.

India is more hungry than Bangladesh, why should Bangladeshi's go into a more hungry country than their own?

Global Hunger Index | International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)

India may have more hungrier people.But that is only concentrated in some 6 to 7 states .Rest 23 states are fast developing or developed.You cant ignore.Fact that we have growth engines in our country .And it will be remain like that in future.

 

[SrNair]

China has other options, where it can make as much money in ROI than they can make in India. The only reason small countries have less growth compared to big countries is because they are less politically stable, but to solve that stability problem, what I proposed is a military alliance, so hostile powers cannot abuse and destabilize these small nations. Asia has 1.7 billion people out of which at least 1.5 billion are in under developed countries. Sub-saharan Africa has close to a billion and there are at least 500 million in Latin America. So in all there is about 3 billion people in Asia, Sub-saharan Africa and Latin America where Chinese investments can make much more profit than they can make in India. And none of these states will be pointing nuclear war heads aimed at Beijing and none are occupying 84,000 sq. km of its land illegally.



I understand your points, but I present the other side of that argument. Of course ultimately the decision is for the Chinese govt. and leaders to make and whichever way China makes that decision, we Bangladeshi's will wish the best outcome from those decisions. Hopefully China will have some leverage over India and can ask Indian govt. to stop its abuse of the smaller neighbors.

You are wrong about that.
Now news are coming that due to the rising of India economy it small neighbours cant get FDI.We have skilled people and market ,something that no other country in this cant offer except China only for now.

 

[Tractor]

The problem is you cannot truly judge the whole situation by personal experience. On a macro level, national interest trumps all experiences from a personal level.

He even don't know the boundary issue existed then I can understand him but if he do know the issue then I can say he maybe come here for some special reasons I mean say something for government.

 

[Sam Manekshaw]

Imagine a stronger Russia-china-India ..nobody will afford to mess in places around us....border dispute can be resolve peacefully if we keep nationalism aside....what i can see there is common interest between all these three . Believe it or not it going to happen in future.

 

[Okemos]

Imagine a stronger Russia-china-India ..nobody will afford to mess in places around us....border dispute can be resolve peacefully if we keep nationalism aside....what i can see there is common interest between all these three . Believe it or not it going to happen in future.

Russia is in danger of collapsing after Putin. Russia is a a dangerous democracy much worse than Thailand because Russia's politics is built around oligarchs with Putin as their head.

Plus, I don't see any alignment can last between countries with such diverse cultures and turbulent history. common interests constantly shift.

 

[Jlaw]

Learn how China and Russia governments solved the Sino-Russia border dispute (now no issue at the North China border), Chinese and Russian also fought for it in 1960s.

Let's not learn about that. China lost territories with Russia.

 

[Okemos]

I do not see western gov't being too enthusiastic to invest in India. If they do, it will definitely cost more and it comes with political strings attached.

At the same time, it's beneficial to China. Let them overpay for projects and let them worry about western political strings attached to the projects. It keeps them poor and gives China the edge without doing anything.

Even though the border has the high plateaus, but that is what fighters and missiles are for. Look at the present situation. We know that the US cannot impose any economic sanctions against China because it will hurt them, especially their multinational corporations in China. Corporations are unpatriotic and will sell state secrets if they could for profits. Having tasted the 100 years humiliation, why put China in such risk again. It may not happen until 40-50 years but I sure do not want my grandchildren to have to face a formidable opponent due to this generations greed and lack of hindsight.

Pretty much. Corporations are greedy and mostly short sighted. Why would they care about China's future in 100 years or 50 years when they are polluting China for their own benefits even now? Plus, in today's world, rich people can migrate across borders. Average citizens should take care of their own life and not rely on corporations. But the worst thing is average citizens are also extremely short sighted. Plus, most Chinese are shrewd business people, but lack political wisdom.

 

[Jlaw]

I thought we already made the offer to finance $300 billion for India's infrastructure plan?

And we are expecting decent returns.

Though frankly, any returns at all would be better than useless US treasury bonds.

Useless US currency is more stable than useless rupees. Even you cannot deny that my friend.

 

[armchairPrivate]

Why let some border issues get in the way of doing business?

Let's make some money!!!!

 

[bolo]

Pretty much. Corporations are greedy and mostly short sighted. Why would they care about China's future in 100 years or 50 years when they are polluting China for their own benefits even now? Plus, in today's world, rich people can migrate across borders. Average citizens should take care of their own life and not rely on corporations. But the worst thing is average citizens are also extremely short sighted. Plus, most Chinese are shrewd business people, but lack political wisdom.

business people do not make good statesmen. They will sell the country out.