What's new

India and China moving towards closer relations

NEW DELHI: With the Asia-Pacific region emerging as the theatre of escalating US-China rivalry, India on Wednesday found itself in a rare and enviable situation: of being wooed by the competing giants.

Visiting US defence secretary Leon Panetta said India would be "a linchpin" in America's unfolding new defence strategy that revolves around "re-balancing" its forces "towards" Asia-Pacific, while Chinese vice premier Li Keqiang told foreign minister SM Krishna that Sino-Indian ties would be the most important bilateral relationship in the 21st Century.


Li's remark to Krishna, on the sidelines of the SCO summit in Beijing, is significant not just because he is slated to take over as China's premier from Wen Jiabao after the transition process starting July this year is over. But also since it virtually echoed US President Barack Obama's statement earlier to Indian Parliament terming the ties between the two democracies as the "defining partnership of 21st century".

Panetta said, "America is at a turning point. After a decade of war, we are developing the new defence strategy. In particular, we will expand our military partnerships and our presence in the arc extending from the Western Pacific and East Asia into the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) and South Asia. Defence cooperation with India is a linchpin in this strategy."

China, which after the over 5,000-km Agni-V missile's test had sniggered at India for harbouring super-power ambitions, seems to have switched to a conciliatory tone and, suddenly, respectful of New Delhi's strategic autonomy.

The tactic found expression in the People's Daily which gushingly proclaimed that India with an independent foreign policy could not be manipulated, even as it slammed the new US strategy that includes progressively shifting 60% of the formidable American naval combat fleet to Asia-Pacific.

Recognizing Asia-Pacific's emergence as the new economic hub, the US has decided to focus on the region as part of what they call the pivot towards Asia. The new strategic posture has been welcomed by the countries in the region which have been at the receiving end of the muscle flexing by China that claims the entire South China Sea as its exclusive domain.

Caught between?

The unfolding rivalry creates problems for India. It is uneasy about China's aggrandizement and wants unhindered access to and through the South China Sea. Yet, it does not want to be seen as being part of any American grand design to contain China, already miffed with the new strategy being enunciated by the US.

India wants to further step up its defence cooperation with the US on a bilateral basis but clearly does not want additional naval forces in an already-militarized IOR and surrounding regions.

Defence minister AK Antony indirectly conveyed to Panetta that the US needed to recalibrate or rethink the policy. He emphasized there was a "need to strengthen the multilateral security architecture" in the Asia Pacific and that it must "move at a pace comfortable to all countries concerned".

Antony, however, did say India fully supported "unhindered freedom of navigation in international waters for all", given its own bitter experience of being needled by China in the contentious South China Sea.

But in another indication of India not being supportive of US actively jumping into the fray in South China Sea, where China is jostling with countries like the Philippines, Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia and Singapore on territorial claims, Antony said it was "desirable" that the "parties concerned themselves should settle contentious matters in accordance with international laws".


Panetta, after earlier ruffling the prickly Chinese feathers, on Wednesday also struck a conciliatory note. Delivering a lecture, he said that even as India and the US "deepen" their bilateral defence partnership, the two would also seek to strengthen their ties with China.

"We recognise China has a critical role to play in advancing security and prosperity in this region. The US welcomes the rise of a strong, prosperous and a successful China that plays a greater role in global affairs - and respects and enforces the international norms that have governed this region for six decades," he said.

India was pleased with the outcome of the Krishna-Li meeting, making the Indian foreign minister one of the first leaders to have any substantial interaction with next generation of Chinese leaders.

Xi Jinping, who has been anointed successor to President Hu Jintao, was scheduled to visit India last year but it never materialized. Many described it as a missed opportunity for India in engaging the leader who would be president
US, China woo India for control over Asia-Pacific - Times Of India
 
.
Exactly that is the delusion I was talking about.

Chinese think US won't attack them because they provide the Anglo Americans markets and cheap manufacturing units to produce goods and also buffer to balance Russian power etc. But these are not inevitable for sustenance of Anglo American global autocracy. As long as people living in other parts of the world, there will be markets and cheap manufacturing units and Russians can again turn into their allies just like in the WWII. Now, the question is why Anglo Americans and also the Europeans will turn hostile towards Chinese and attack China. It is the same reason for which Anglo Saxons, French and Russians invaded Quin dynasty China which resulted in two Opium Wars. Did you read this part of history? Are you aware of the causes, courses and consequences of the Opium Wars? I hope you are.

The G2 concept of Kissinger and Brzezinski you are talking about is the same delusion which prompted the Chinese to join the colonial Alliance against Berlin-Tokyo anti-colonizing movement. Now the Allied colonizers of course say that Berlin-Tokyo was just another colonizing force since they faced military challenges from them and since it was only military which could end colonialism. To cut an iron, you need a piece of iron. The point is Chinese joined the Allied forces with the hope that they would be treated fairly, equally if they get victory. They did get victory, but the Chinese soon found how delusional they were as soon after the end of WW II, they received nuclear threats to their existence from Douglas MacArthur and also from their beloved Russian comrades. The Chinese got the test of reality though it was not the first time they did but as usual they chose to remain delusional perhaps because they had no other option throughout the Cold War. Yes, they developed so called nuclear deterrence and other stuff but it actually shows how desperate they had to be for their survival.

The scenario is like China is pissed off because it cannot get equal treatment from Anglo Americans who don't give a **** to equality or equal demands for which they will continue to treat Chinese as if Chinese are inferior or just slaves. Yes, they admit Chinese do have skills, Chinese are hardworking, well, slaves are also hardworking and skilled laborers. Hardworking and skill or merit don't make you masters, you may be rich because you earned the hardworking money but you can still be slave because you have to serve the interests of others who don't treat you as equal partner. You can't decide on your own and your decision is subject to change as it becomes contingent on the approval of some other guy, it does not mean you have to be poor or deprived of satisfactory material wealth. It only means you will only be deprived of your self respect or your own wills.

Even if we forget all these historical lessons, still, Anglo Americans may create excuses to attack China because they may start believing that attacking China would be good for them. Their belief may be misplaced but they won't give a damn to that. Thats more than enough for them to attack anyone. If you know psychology you know what violent impulse means. If I am a violent guy and I want to slit someone's throat, I would look for any single opportunity to do that and for that I will create excuses like I just didn't like the way he looked at me or he just appeared to be threat to me, so on and so forth. If I don't attack him, that would also be for some reason like I fear to get caught or like he may retaliate with equal force or like I still don't have the opportunity I am looking for. Anglo Americans like the same way may attack you any day, any time if they think the moment is appropriate and they will make excuses for that, its not difficult for them. In the wild, some animals are violent and its not essential for them to attack you out of hunger or feeling of insecurity, they may simply attack you for no valid reason.

Lol Indian dude tried to sell American threat to us:rofl:, bottom line we know how to manage relation with others for our interest...and don't worry we have a second plan :azn: if everything fail :smokin:

But we're not so naive as those who call "Indi Chini bla bla: with forward policy" and expect us to buy that...after 1962...they have realised that we're not so naive after all.
 
.
Lol Indian dude tried to sell American threat to us:rofl:, bottom line we know how to manage relation with others for our interest...and don't worry we have a second plan :azn: if everything fail :smokin:

But we're not so naive as those who call "Indi Chini bla bla: with forward policy" and expect us to buy that...after 1962...they have realised that we're not so naive after all.


This is just one such example for which I consider the Chinese so naive and delusional. I really sometimes wonder whether you guys are really such naive as you can't get easy-to-understand substances straight to your brains. With such intelligence, you can hardly pass the IPS or IAS Preliminary exams conducted by the UPSC in India. No chances!

My post was in reply to your compatriot who talked about the G-2 and the mythical love story between USA and China. I just asked him to face reality which is like China will be forced to fight the entire Anglo empire, which is not country specific like China vs USA, its more like China vs USA-Britain-Canada-Australia and perhaps Russia and some European vassal nations, to be correct to say. This was why I referred to the Opium Wars during the Quin dynasty. Japan didn't attack Pearl Harbor just to have fun, Japan was compelled to do that even it knew the consequences. Japan with its economic rise felt suffocated when it discovered how it was pushed to the wall, cornered for which it had to tear apart the noose around its neck and with force if necessary. Pearl Harbor attack was the culmination of decades old injustice to Japan. China will be forced to act in the same way under same circumstances. It has begun already.

Even if China does not attack, they will attack and they have the plan which is known to the press. Therefore you can't manage every relationship if others make the relationship non-manageable. If you have second plan, they have third plan and that is why they are the empire while we are their subordinates. China no longer cannot accept bully from the Anglo emperors as Chinese with their new found hardworking wealth expect equal treatment whereas Anglo emperors cannot let China demand equality, so conflict is unavoidable. You cannot manage it no matter how much you re conciliate.
 
.
It will be a great mistake for India to make any closer relationship with China because China is the target of Anglo American hawks and anyone allies with China will share the Anglo American onslaught. May be today China's rise appears spectacular, but this rise is cometary and China will soon meet its demise. Now, naive Chinese, as usual may believe their richness is permanent but the problem is that the poor education system in China has never taught the Chinese the historical inevitability or the courses in history which could not be avoided. I don't know whether Chinese know their own history very well, particularly how they were treated towards the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th, as their autocratic governments teach the history which helps its to sustain its autocracy and for that they could distort facts, self glorify when they in reality fail, everything.

If Chinese still believe that US will never attack them because of trade or something like that, then they should look at how good trade was between Germany and Russia just before Germany launched the Operation Barbarossa in 1941 or how good trade was between Japan and USA prior to the break out of bloody war between them. In fact, its actually trade and close bilateral relationship which brings two parties closer to get involved in war with each other.

LoL I completely agree with your analysis, except I have been telling the exact same thing to Americans.
 
. . .
China and India are increasing cooperation in a range of issues, such as bilateral trade, new reserve currencies in the global economy, climate talks, various issues at the UN, etc.

With that said, China likely won't opt for better political relations until they and India solve the border disputes between them (there's also the Tibet issue). The main sticking issues in the border talks seem to be India's insistence on taking all of the disputed land and China's insistence on Tawang (which is heavily linked to the Tibet issue).

We'll see in time whether China and India can work out their differences (or not) :)
 
.
This is just one such example for which I consider the Chinese so naive and delusional. I really sometimes wonder whether you guys are really such naive as you can't get easy-to-understand substances straight to your brains. With such intelligence, you can hardly pass the IPS or IAS Preliminary exams conducted by the UPSC in India. No chances!

My post was in reply to your compatriot who talked about the G-2 and the mythical love story between USA and China. I just asked him to face reality which is like China will be forced to fight the entire Anglo empire, which is not country specific like China vs USA, its more like China vs USA-Britain-Canada-Australia and perhaps Russia and some European vassal nations, to be correct to say. This was why I referred to the Opium Wars during the Quin dynasty. Japan didn't attack Pearl Harbor just to have fun, Japan was compelled to do that even it knew the consequences. Japan with its economic rise felt suffocated when it discovered how it was pushed to the wall, cornered for which it had to tear apart the noose around its neck and with force if necessary. Pearl Harbor attack was the culmination of decades old injustice to Japan. China will be forced to act in the same way under same circumstances. It has begun already.

Even if China does not attack, they will attack and they have the plan which is known to the press. Therefore you can't manage every relationship if others make the relationship non-manageable. If you have second plan, they have third plan and that is why they are the empire while we are their subordinates. China no longer cannot accept bully from the Anglo emperors as Chinese with their new found hardworking wealth expect equal treatment whereas Anglo emperors cannot let China demand equality, so conflict is unavoidable. You cannot manage it no matter how much you re conciliate.

If China forced to fight the entire Anglo empire, we will call India as reinforcement :rofl: for now we just enjoy G2 privilege...even if American is our Frienemy, we're trying cozy Americans as much as Indians, you guys are lucky to get 24 Apaches, 6 C-17 and more ...we got nothing :cry:
 
.
It was Nehru who started the Sino-Indian War with his Forward Policy.

If that is what you call "friendly", then please keep it to yourself.

Come out of your delusional world, how many countries still left with whom you have not fought war??? you even forcefully captured peace loving country of tibet. Is this your friendship? we don't need your friendship, let pk and NK enjoy it :lol:
 
.
Manitaining status quo is important and solving the boundary dispute with no exchange of populated areas is the key. Also China should be more sensitive to core interests of India and similarly India should be more sensitive China's core interest, which will decrease the trust deficit to very low levels.


An Idea to chinese ccp, Just publish a news Manmohan is a great leader and see the congress govt stating the China is greatest power in world.
 
.
Come out of your delusional world, how many countries still left with whom you have not fought war??? you even forcefully captured peace loving country of tibet. Is this your friendship? we don't need your friendship, let pk and NK enjoy it :lol:

Global Peace Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

#89 - China

#148 - India

Enough said. :lol:

And before you make fun of North Korea, remember that they have a life expectancy above the world average, while India's life expectancy is far below the world average. NK also has a lower maternal mortality rate than India, lower malnutrition rates, and far higher access to education and sanitation than India does. Nearly 100% of North Korea's population has access to toilets.

So, despite the obvious failure of North Korea, they still beat India in pretty much every single social development indicator.
 
.
@CD and other Chinese members would you personally like your country to give up your claim on Arunachal Pradesh if we decide to do the same with Aksai Chin
 
.
@CD and other Chinese members would you personally like your country to give up your claim on Arunachal Pradesh if we decide to do the same with Aksai Chin

That deal was already offered by China back in the 1950's, recognition of Arunachal Pradesh in return for recognition of Aksai Chin. This was back when we were extremely weak and making large (and often unfavourable) compromises on all our land-border disputes.

Nehru wasn't interested. He wanted both Arunachal Pradesh and Aksai Chin, he refused to compromise at all.

Nowadays, the time for that deal has passed. China is now in a stronger position vis-a-vis India then we have ever been, since the founding of the PRC. There is no way to sell such a compromise now.
 
.
That deal was already offered by China back in the 1950's, recognition of Arunachal Pradesh in return for recognition of Aksai Chin. This was back when we were extremely weak and making large (and often unfavourable) compromises on all our land-border disputes.

Nehru wasn't interested. He wanted both Arunachal Pradesh and Aksai Chin, he refused to compromise at all.

Nowadays, the time for that deal has passed. China is now in a stronger position vis-a-vis India then we have ever been, since the founding of the PRC. There is no way to sell such a compromise now.

That was the only "right" decision from Nehru. Arunachal is not going anywhere. It is and will remain with India although I am not sure about Aksai Chin which can/cannot be gained partially or fully
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom