China offers to finance 30 per cent of India’s infrastructure development plan

[Chinese-Dragon]

Yes mate all the chinese neighbours are aggressive fascist,it must be hard for peaceful rising china.

We haven't had any bloodshed on any of our borders for over 30 years.

Meanwhile, India has regular bloodshed on their border with Pakistan, and their border with Bangladesh.

In fact, just a short while back on India's borders some soldiers had their heads cut off, and their bodies cut to pieces. Not to mention soldiers regularly being shot, border security personnel, and even cattle traders. They seem to shoot at anything that moves, soldiers or civilians alike.

Last but not least, China is ranked FAR above India on the Global Peace Index:

Global Peace Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[chhota bheem]

We haven't had any bloodshed on any of our borders for over 30 years.

Meanwhile, India has regular bloodshed on their border with Pakistan, and their border with Bangladesh.

In fact, just a short while back on India's borders some soldiers had their heads cut off, and their bodies cut to pieces. Not to mention soldiers regularly being shot, border security personnel, and even cattle traders. They seem to shoot at anything that moves, soldiers or civilians alike.

Last but not least, China is ranked FAR above India on the Global Peace Index:

Global Peace Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ok thats why i said peaceful rising china,and the neighbours are aggressive,do have doubts ?

 

[Vinod2070]

We haven't had any bloodshed on any of our borders for over 30 years.

Meanwhile, India has regular bloodshed on their border with Pakistan, and their border with Bangladesh.

In fact, just a short while back on India's borders some soldiers had their heads cut off, and their bodies cut to pieces. Not to mention soldiers regularly being shot, border security personnel, and even cattle traders. They seem to shoot at anything that moves, soldiers or civilians alike.

Last but not least, China is ranked FAR above India on the Global Peace Index:

Global Peace Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have a track record of making your wishes come true.

Just as an example, many of the Xinxiang killings started after you made similar claims earlier.

It is more likely that you will have a war with one of your neighbors than we having a war with our neighbors. All your aggressive claims over entire seas and distant islands based on some mythical ancient past will likely ensure that.

Obviously I hope none of it happens.

Aren't we always the ones extending an olive branch?

Zhou Enlai made an offer to India in 1960, to swap recognition of AP for recognition of Aksai Chin. Do you know how difficult it is for any Chinese to offer a compromise on our territory? Yet we did it anyway, because we had much bigger enemies to worry about (USA + Soviets), not to mention we were in the middle of the worst famine in our entire history (the Great leap forward).

Nehru rejected that incredibly generous offer, and instead started the Forward Policy against us, setting up Indian military outposts NORTH of the McMahon line, the place where India does not actually claim any land! That was the start of the Sino-Indian War, and despite our famine (and the enmity of the two superpowers) we managed to succeed.

Of course now they paint it as "Chinese aggression" (even though their own historians blame Nehru).

History will remember it was us who offered to compromise, same then, same now. And if India chooses to reject our offer again (which is very likely), they won't have anyone else to blame for their own problems.

That is your way of looking at it. Things are more complex than that.

The border issue is a colonial legacy and should have been handled better. Mistakes were committed from both sides and this ridiculous current situation is more due to the Chinese intransigence that is on display with all it's neighbors.

Claiming entire seas is only one part of what is in store for its neighbors.

 

[Vinod2070]

You can't blame Indians; everyone would welcome FDI.

Also, this can be seen positively as a genuine effort by China to extend an olive branch to India for friendship. History would record that, at least, China made the effort.

I hope even you don't presume you sound objective here and not someone overtaken by those pheromones?

China spending money to develop Indian infrastructure is a short-term thinking which will backfire in the long term.

Yes, they don't know what is good for them. They need to know it from a know it all, firing on all pheromones.

If China needs to invest somewhere, it should do so in Indonesia. Indonesia is looking more favorable as a long term investment. Also, it sits right next to the Malacca Straits and China needs to increase influence in that region. A bonus would be that a strong Indonesia would throw a major kink in the US-Australia alliance being formed against China in the region.

May be Pakistan and Yemen will do exactly that. Chinese decision makers don't seem to be asking for free advice here.

It is amazing how personal bigotry (against someone who saved them from Islamists) can so cloud someone's thinking.

This is not about money.

Japan and the West invested in China because it was -- and remains -- one of the most logical places to invest, offering high ROI. This is simply not the case with India, since many other countries are far better bets and attract more FDI -- especially as a percent of their GDP.

This offer is about buying influence and, unlike Japanese money, Chinese money has to battle against outstanding India-China issues.

You can rest assured that the "outstanding India-China issues" are nothing compared to the "outstanding Japan-China issues" when Japan invested so heavily in China.

Hallucinations don't count for much.

We can outbid Japan in any situation. Check their recent non-existent economic growth rate.

And our currency reserves are larger than the rest of the world's currency reserves combined.

Which means we can afford to offer financing/loans to other countries at the cheapest possible rate.

So we get the contracts. Not to mention, we have by far the most experience in building infrastructure in the developing world, and everyone knows it.

We get the payment in the short-term, while it will take a decade for the receiving country to recoup costs from the infrastructure (since infrastructure is generally a long term investment in any case).

By the time that happens, we'll have used the money we earned to move far ahead. Too far ahead to catch.

It is a little too simplistic.

China's own history of the last 2 decades belies much of it.

 

[timetravel]

Let the Chinese invest money... India needs money and China has it.

India can put safeguards for which sectors the Chinese can invest in, how much % they can invest, and whether or how many workers they can bring.

India can set the terms for the investors from China to invest in India. Now it would be upto China whether they want to invest knowing the terms set by India. I say China would invest no matter what the terms from India, because any investment in India would be better than the current investment in US treasuries.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

It is a little too simplistic.

China's own history of the last 2 decades belies much of it.

I don't get your meaning?

China DOES have larger currency reserves than the rest of the world combined. Which means we can afford to lend money at the cheapest rates.

And we DO have by far the most experience in building infrastructure in the developing world.

And infrastructure does pay out to a country over the long-term, which is good for a country, but more difficult for a private business since they have to wait for returns. In our case it is easier, since we will be building the overseas infrastructure on contract, and getting paid for it. We won't have to wait until the infrastructure pays out in this case, we can immediately put the money into something else.

 

[Brahmos_2]

We must welcome Chinese investment in road and rail sector....

 

[Vinod2070]

I don't get your meaning?

China DOES have larger currency reserves than the rest of the world combined. Which means we can afford to lend money at the cheapest rates.

And we DO have by far the most experience in building infrastructure in the developing world.

And infrastructure does pay out to a country over the long-term, which is good for a country, but more difficult for a private business since they have to wait for returns. In our case it is easier, since we will be building the overseas infrastructure on contract, and getting paid for it. We won't have to wait until the infrastructure pays out in this case, we can immediately put the money into something else.

I meant that China invested heavily in infrastructure and also grew rapidly over the last 2 decades.

Many other developing countries have also done that. So fast growth and infra investments are not mutually exclusive, in fact they are complimentary.

Also, China is now at a stage where things will need to change at a structural level for continuing the rapid growth. Just scaling out the existing models will not likely work. Will be interesting to see how that plays out.

 

[bolo]

I meant that China invested heavily in infrastructure and also grew rapidly over the last 2 decades.

Many other developing countries have also done that. So fast growth and infra investments are not mutually exclusive, in fact they are complimentary.

Also, China is now at a stage where things will need to change at a structural level for continuing the rapid growth. Just scaling out the existing models will not likely work. Will be interesting to see how that plays out.

Not really. China's manufacturing is probably resemble the US from 1960s. Still have room to grow.

 

[Vinod2070]

Not really. China's manufacturing is probably resemble the US from 1960s. Still have room to grow.

No, China crossed the USA to become the largest manufacturer some years back.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Also, China is now at a stage where things will need to change at a structural level for continuing the rapid growth. Just scaling out the existing models will not likely work. Will be interesting to see how that plays out.

We are currently in the middle of an enormous economic transition, away from an investment-fueled economic model, towards a consumption-fueled economic model.

Which is one of the major reasons we are diverting so much of our investment overseas now. The domestic market is already saturated with investment.

 

[Vinod2070]

We are currently in the middle of an enormous economic transition, away from an investment-fueled economic model, towards a consumption-fueled economic model.

Which is one of the major reasons we are diverting so much of our investment overseas now. The domestic market is already saturated with investment.

Yes but for the next wave of expansion, something more fundamental has to change. The transition from middle income to high income is much more difficult for any country, especially the large ones like China and India.

Looking forward to see how China deals with it. There will be important lessons for my country as well from what happens here.

 

[captain Maximo]

this is really odd India recently rejected aid from the UK saying it was not needed now they are taking it from china ? whats up with that

 

[Vinod2070]

this is really odd India recently rejected aid from the UK saying it was not needed now they are taking it from china ? whats up with that

There is a difference between investment and aid?