I respectfully disagree with Brahma Chellaney in his June 25 article, "Dancing with the dragon." As a center-left American, I agree with President Barack Obama's approach to China and would prefer that he go further. If any country is likely to become the next superpower, it is China. It is ahead of India in gross domestic product, economic power, agricultural production, manufacturing, science (papers published and scientists produced), and technology (patents and engineers graduated).
To make things worse, China is pulling ahead of India in military technology (e.g., stealth aircraft, phased array radar, cruise and ballistic missiles, and directed energy weapons), semiconductors, computers, biotechnology and nanotechnology. China is also acquiring natural resources outside of China like a vacuum and already rivals the U.S. as a polluter. Should we not deal with China now before things get out of hand?
China is probably one of the most secular countries in the world and, compared to India, is more tolerant of different religions as long as you register with the state. This feature fits nicely with American values. The only problem, of course, is that China is NOT a democracy. But we have had alliances with a Meiji Era emperor, the shah of Iran, military dictatorships and states that were democracies in name only. The fact is that China will eventually become a democracy, though that may take decades.
We should work with China and treat it with respect; develop relations with the Communist Party, the People's Liberation Army, the state-owned enterprises, the universities, and the science and engineering academies; and keep trading. Over time the relationship will evolve into a true partnership.
There is no reason to turn a competitor into an enemy by "balancing" China's neighbors against it. Historically, ANY rising power reacts as an enemy when other nations band together to try to "manage" its rise.
For its part, India should focus on helping the U.S. in Pakistan and Afghanistan and forget about forming or joining an anti-Chinese coalition.
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/rc20090702a5.html
Covering at least 1.5 billion people across India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Maldives and Afghanistan, the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation is one of the largest regional organizations in the world. But its achievements so far have been so minimal that even its constituents have become lackadaisical in their attitudes toward it. The state of regional cooperation in South Asia can be gleaned from the fact that Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani went to Bhutan via Nepal, using Chinese territory in Tibet rather than the straightforward route through India.
For long, the dominant narrative of SAARC has been how the India-Pakistan rivalry hampers the group's evolution into something significant. That is now losing salience amid China's growing dominance of the South Asian landscape.
China entered SAARC as an observer in 2005, supported by most member states; India could do little about it and so acquiesced. Now, much to India's consternation, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal are supporting China's full membership in SAARC. China's rising profile in South Asia is not news. What is astonishing is the diminishing role of India and the rapidity with which New Delhi is ceding strategic space to Beijing on the subcontinent.
Even as China becomes the largest trade partner of most states in South Asia, including India, New Delhi is busy repeating the old mantra of South Asia being India's exclusive sphere of influence.
Of course, no one takes note of that anymore. Pakistan's all-weather friendship with China is well-known, but the reach of China in other South Asian states has been extraordinary. Bangladesh and Sri Lanka view India as more interested in creating barriers against exports than in spurring regional economic integration. India's protectionist tendencies have allowed China to don the mantle of regional economic leader. Instead of India emerging as the facilitator of socio-economic development in Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bhutan, it is China's developmental assistance that has impact.
India's attempts to keep China out of the subcontinent have clearly not worked, and it's time to re-evaluate its South Asia policy. China's strategy toward South Asia is premised on encircling India and confining her within the geographical coordinates of the region. This strategy of using proxies started with Pakistan and has gradually evolved to include other states in the region, including Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal. China is entering markets in South Asia more aggressively through trade and investment, improving linkages with South Asian states through treaties and bilateral cooperation.
Yet, there is no hope for regional economic cooperation in the absence of Indian leadership. The failure of India to counter China's rise has made it even more unlikely that such cooperation will evolve productively. As the two regional giants compete with each other in the near future, they will be more focused on relative gains vis-a-vis each other than on the absolute gains that regional cooperation can bestow.
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/eo20100517a2.html
It would appear that even China's bitter rival does not see India as an equal... Well, one author is American and the other -- British. But that only goes to show how India's former and current master(s) disdain Indians...
To make things worse, China is pulling ahead of India in military technology (e.g., stealth aircraft, phased array radar, cruise and ballistic missiles, and directed energy weapons), semiconductors, computers, biotechnology and nanotechnology. China is also acquiring natural resources outside of China like a vacuum and already rivals the U.S. as a polluter. Should we not deal with China now before things get out of hand?
China is probably one of the most secular countries in the world and, compared to India, is more tolerant of different religions as long as you register with the state. This feature fits nicely with American values. The only problem, of course, is that China is NOT a democracy. But we have had alliances with a Meiji Era emperor, the shah of Iran, military dictatorships and states that were democracies in name only. The fact is that China will eventually become a democracy, though that may take decades.
We should work with China and treat it with respect; develop relations with the Communist Party, the People's Liberation Army, the state-owned enterprises, the universities, and the science and engineering academies; and keep trading. Over time the relationship will evolve into a true partnership.
There is no reason to turn a competitor into an enemy by "balancing" China's neighbors against it. Historically, ANY rising power reacts as an enemy when other nations band together to try to "manage" its rise.
For its part, India should focus on helping the U.S. in Pakistan and Afghanistan and forget about forming or joining an anti-Chinese coalition.
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/rc20090702a5.html
Covering at least 1.5 billion people across India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Maldives and Afghanistan, the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation is one of the largest regional organizations in the world. But its achievements so far have been so minimal that even its constituents have become lackadaisical in their attitudes toward it. The state of regional cooperation in South Asia can be gleaned from the fact that Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani went to Bhutan via Nepal, using Chinese territory in Tibet rather than the straightforward route through India.
For long, the dominant narrative of SAARC has been how the India-Pakistan rivalry hampers the group's evolution into something significant. That is now losing salience amid China's growing dominance of the South Asian landscape.
China entered SAARC as an observer in 2005, supported by most member states; India could do little about it and so acquiesced. Now, much to India's consternation, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal are supporting China's full membership in SAARC. China's rising profile in South Asia is not news. What is astonishing is the diminishing role of India and the rapidity with which New Delhi is ceding strategic space to Beijing on the subcontinent.
Even as China becomes the largest trade partner of most states in South Asia, including India, New Delhi is busy repeating the old mantra of South Asia being India's exclusive sphere of influence.
Of course, no one takes note of that anymore. Pakistan's all-weather friendship with China is well-known, but the reach of China in other South Asian states has been extraordinary. Bangladesh and Sri Lanka view India as more interested in creating barriers against exports than in spurring regional economic integration. India's protectionist tendencies have allowed China to don the mantle of regional economic leader. Instead of India emerging as the facilitator of socio-economic development in Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bhutan, it is China's developmental assistance that has impact.
India's attempts to keep China out of the subcontinent have clearly not worked, and it's time to re-evaluate its South Asia policy. China's strategy toward South Asia is premised on encircling India and confining her within the geographical coordinates of the region. This strategy of using proxies started with Pakistan and has gradually evolved to include other states in the region, including Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal. China is entering markets in South Asia more aggressively through trade and investment, improving linkages with South Asian states through treaties and bilateral cooperation.
Yet, there is no hope for regional economic cooperation in the absence of Indian leadership. The failure of India to counter China's rise has made it even more unlikely that such cooperation will evolve productively. As the two regional giants compete with each other in the near future, they will be more focused on relative gains vis-a-vis each other than on the absolute gains that regional cooperation can bestow.
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/eo20100517a2.html
It would appear that even China's bitter rival does not see India as an equal... Well, one author is American and the other -- British. But that only goes to show how India's former and current master(s) disdain Indians...
Last edited:
