What's new

One Belt, One Road not international venture: India

And how long did this empire last?

Hundreds of years. You are talking about times when there was no international body and sovereignty didn't exist. China wasn't a single country for many centuries either.

The truth is that India is a geographical expression. Just because Napoleon or Hitler dominated Europe for a few years doesn't mean that Europe is one country.

Incorrect. There have been many times when India was united in one way or another. China isn't any different.
 
.
Hundreds of years. You are talking about times when there was no international body and sovereignty didn't exist. China wasn't a single country for many centuries either.



Incorrect. There have been many times when India was united in one way or another. China isn't any different.

India was mostly divided in the last couple thousand of years. With maybe a few hundred years where an empire would conquers most of Indian subcontinent. China was mostly united with about a few hundred years of division. Chinese people gas the conscious of one country for two thousand plus years.

But India never has a conscious of being one country until the British put it there. The ancient India empires existed as the Empire, not as India.
 
.
India was mostly divided in the last couple thousand of years. With maybe a few hundred years where an empire would conquers most of Indian subcontinent. China was mostly united with about a few hundred years of division. Chinese people gas the conscious of one country for two thousand plus years.

But India never has a conscious of being one country until the British put it there. The ancient India empires existed as the Empire, not as India.

In that sense China was divided after Qing fell. All previous empires before PRC were also empires, not countries.

China's history is very different from India's. India's history was far more dynamic, foreign invasions used to last hundreds of years and fighting was constant. India was richer and had more people in a significantly smaller area of land. Otoh, Chinese kings rarely put up a fight, so division of China was less in frequency, not to mention the millennia of isolation.

The fact is all Indians today identify themselves with India.

The British tried dividing India before they left, they partly succeeded with Pakistan, but British India was nowhere as united as today's India is.

This was British Raj.

India-princely-states.gif


The British constantly pit kingdoms against each other, that's why they lasted that long. There were nearly 600 kingdoms during British rule. That's why we have the Kashmir conflict.

Republic of India has no kingdoms. It's truly united.

I don't know why it is constantly repeated, but India was nowhere near being united under British rule.
 
.
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/587944/after-pak-general-chinese-media.html
Beijing, Dec 23, 2016 (PTI)



China will strongly oppose any attempt to label Pakistan as "supporting terrorism", Chinese official media today said and suggested India to accept the "olive branch" extended by a top Pakistani military General to participate in the USD 46 billion economic corridor.

"Surprise aside (over General's call), New Delhi should consider accepting the olive branch Pakistan has extended in a bid to participate in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor," said an articlein the state-run Global Times.

The comments came after Lt Gen Riaz, Commander of the Pakistan's Southern Command which is based in Quetta, this week reportedly said India should "shun enmity" with Pakistan and "join the USD 46-billion CPEC along with Iran, Afghanistan and other Central Asian countries and enjoy its benefits".

"Such an opportunity could be transient. There is a possibility that the open attitude toward India joining the CPEC will quickly be overwhelmed by opposition voices from Pakistan if New Delhi does not respond in a timely manner to the General's overture," the article said.

"The best way to reduce hostilities is by establishing economic cooperation based on mutual benefits to put aside what cannot be reached by a consensus," it said.

It said that India could boost its exports and slash its trade deficit with China via new trade routes that would be opened up by the CPEC. In addition, the northern part of India bordering Pakistan and Jammu and Kashmir will gain more economic growth momentum if India joins the project, it said.

Another article in the same daily said "Riaz's invitation, which came as a surprise to New Delhi, is mainly intended as a gesture. While he hinted at India's intervention in the CPEC, he welcomed India's participation in the project, demonstrating Pakistan does not want to exclude India."

At the same time, it said, "if any country wants to label Pakistan as 'supporting terrorism' and discredit the country, then China and other countries who uphold justice will oppose such behaviour strongly".

The article said that since President Xi Jinping visited Pakistan in April, 2015, the CPEC has advanced considerably. "However, some international forces, and India in particular, are accustomed to look at the CPEC and the One Belt and One Road initiative from a geopolitical perspective. On one side, this is relevant to the geopolitical competition mindset they insist on, on the other, this is because of their excessive speculation on the strategic implications of the CPEC and the Belt and Road," it said.

"To ensure the smooth advancement of the CPEC, it is necessary for Pakistan to have a stable and peaceful domestic and periphery environment and a favourable profile," it said.

On anti-terrorism, the Afghanistan peace process, and the peace and stability of Kashmir, Pakistan is making efforts to show international society its wish to pursue peace, it said.

"The CPEC is not only a bilateral cooperation, but also a multilateral project in the long-run, which aims at regional economic integration. So it's open and inclusive, and China and Pakistan hope India,Afghanistan, Iran and Central Asian countries can participate and become stakeholders," it added.


*************


http://zeenews.india.com/news/india...-through-our-sovereign-territory_1961101.html

New Delhi: India on Friday expressed concern over the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) project being built in Azad Kashmir and said that it violates the country's sovereignty.


Briefing the media on the latest developments on the issue, MEA spokesman Vikas Swarup said New Delhi has raised its concerns to both Pakistan and China, as the “CPEC passes through sovereign Indian territory”.

Beijing has invested more than $60 billion in CPEC aimed at connecting the western China with the Pakistani port of Gwadar near Karachi.

This ambitious multi-billion dollar joint venture is a combination of road and rail travel before it reaches Gwadar.

The venture has evoked a lot of reactions in India with some security analysts accusing China of encircling India to flex its geopolitical muscle in the region.

The project also passes through the restive Baluchistan province in Pakistan.

The Baloch people have been fighting for a sovereign homeland and have been accusing Islamabad of occupying their territory.

Popular public rebellions against the “Pakistani occupation” in the recent past were brutally crushed by the government, forcing many of their leaders to live in exile, including India and other countries.

Baluchistan is the largest province of Pakistan.


First Published: Friday, December 23, 2016 - 17:56
 
Last edited:
.
http://zeenews.india.com/news/world...chinese-workers-for-cpec-project_1961412.html
Karachi: Sindh Chief Minister Syed Murad Ali Shah has said his government is raising a special force of 4,000 policemen to protect Chinese nationals working on various projects in the province, including those under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).


"Security of the Chinese working in Sindh is a top priority of my government. Our Chinese friends are involved in projects which are linked to CPEC and other important schemes.

“We are raising a special force of 2,000 ex-army men for their security," the Dawn quoted Shah, as saying during a meeting with a Chinese delegation led by Foreign Ministry Director General for External Security Liu Guangyuan.

The meeting was told that within the next few months around 100 Chinese firms would begin functioning in Sindh under CPEC.

Both sides discussed the issues relating to workers` security and agreed that appropriate steps would be taken in this regard by the provincial authorities.

Shah said the newly recruited 4,000 policemen were being imparted special training by the army and they would also be assigned the security of the Chinese workers of CPEC projects.

The delegation discussed issues pertaining to the security of the Chinese already working in Sindh and those who would arrive in the coming months as Shah ensured security of every Chinese national working in Sindh, including those involved in non-CPEC and non-governmental projects.

"I have already issued instructions to the police to provide special security to the Chinese working here," he said, adding that more than 800 Chinese were working on energy projects of Thar and 150 policemen had been deployed for their security.

Chief Minister Shah also sought the visiting Chinese delegation's support for including Keti Bandar and Karachi Circular Railway projects in CPEC.


First Published: Saturday, December 24, 2016 - 17:46
 
. . . .
It's funny how the Chinese think OBOR is important to India.

it's not and OBOR was intended to bypass India, while benefitting the countries surrounding it instead.

In that sense China was divided after Qing fell. All previous empires before PRC were also empires, not countries.

China's history is very different from India's. India's history was far more dynamic, foreign invasions used to last hundreds of years and fighting was constant. India was richer and had more people in a significantly smaller area of land. Otoh, Chinese kings rarely put up a fight, so division of China was less in frequency, not to mention the millennia of isolation.

The fact is all Indians today identify themselves with India.

The British tried dividing India before they left, they partly succeeded with Pakistan, but British India was nowhere as united as today's India is.

This was British Raj.

India-princely-states.gif


The British constantly pit kingdoms against each other, that's why they lasted that long. There were nearly 600 kingdoms during British rule. That's why we have the Kashmir conflict.

it's ludicrous how u atually u just reaffirmed this yourself without realising(low iq)- that the India today was a dynamic pithole of different princely states and kingdoms fighting one another all the time and there was division amongst them with the greatest antagonism coming from the aryan north vs the dravidic south(deccan plateau region).
 
Last edited:
.
it's not and OBOR was intended to bypass India, while benefitting the countries surrounding it instead.

Nope. There is another OBOR route called BCIM or Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar Economic Corridor.

BCIM-Map-300-230.jpg


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BCIM_Forum

We are all for connectivity to ASEAN. But we have our own plans when it comes to connectivity to Europe and the Americas.

it's ludicrous how u atually u just reaffirmed this yourself without realising(low iq)- that the India today was a dynamic pithole of different princely states and kingdoms fighting one another all the time and there was division amongst them with the greatest antagonism coming from the aryan north vs the dravidic south(deccan plateau region).

No such division now.
 
.
It said 16 early harvest projects, including several power stations, highways and projects related to Gwadar Port, were under construction.
dc-Cover-7fn92kkrlnl7jfb7be1mfv3mv1-20161129162929.Medi.jpeg

Last month, China started operating the Gwadar Port which is being connected with Xinjiang through the Pakistan occupied Kashmir (Azad Kashmir) by dispatching ships loaded with goods brought by trucks from China to Middle East. (Photo: Representational Image/AFP)
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/worl...progress-after-full-implementation-china.html

Beijing: China's official media on Tuesday played down the growing criticism within Pakistan over the USD 46 billion CPEC, saying the project has made "remarkable progress" though India has opted for "disrupting" the initiative.

"Three years on, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), described by Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif as a "game changer" for the entire region, has entered into full implementation in 2016 and remarkable progresses have been achieved," a commentary in the state-run Xinhua news agency said.

Referring to Chinese ambassador to Pakistan Sun Weidong's comments, it said 16 early harvest projects, including several power stations, highways and projects related to Gwadar Port, were under construction and tens of thousands of new jobs have been created for local people.

Last month, China started operating the Gwadar Port which is being connected with Xinjiang through the Pakistan occupied Kashmir (Azad Kashmir) by dispatching ships loaded with goods brought by trucks from China to Middle East.

"There are at least 39 projects, (in CPEC) the majority of them related to energy, where obvious progress has been seen during 2016," Saeed Chaudhry, director of the Islamabad Council for International Affairs, told Xinhua in a recently.

Chaudhry's remarks include the second phase of upgrading the Karakorum Highway from Havelian to Thakot and the highway linking Pakistan's largest cities of Karachi and Lahore.

Both of the two highways have been smoothly implemented and for the former, the Abbottabad Tunnel construction project has begun and seen substantive progress, it said.

While Xinhua report lauded the progress of the CPEC, an article in the state-run 'Global Times' criticised sections of Pakistani media for taking a critical view of the project.

Written by a research fellow in the Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad (ISSI), the article criticised Pakistani journalist Cyril Almeida for putting out "irresponsible tweets" against the project.

"There is no denying the fact that there has been criticism of CPEC in Pakistan. There has been criticism of the government of Pakistan, mainly of the ruling party, over the percentage of shared routes of CPEC in Pakistan," it said.

"Every province wants to get the most out of it. It is like fighting over a cake before eating it. But even then, no political party ever raised objections against China. Rather, if there is one country over which Pakistan's political parties are united, it is China. The fight among the political parties is 'over CPEC' and 'not against CPEC'," it said.

The report also said it was "undeniable" that there have been controversies over CPEC and particularly, on the 'Belt and Road Initiative' of China.

"Those controversies, which are created at the international level, are an effort to raise doubts about China's intensions. India and the US do not seem to be happy with Beijing's growing regional and global economic clout.

India openly opposed the Belt and Road Initiative and CPEC. It opted for both overt and covert means to disrupt the smooth advancement on these two projects, which are complimentary to each other," it said.

"There is a whole range of challenges in implementing CPEC that if not smartly dealt with, the road to CPEC success would become bumpy. All these challenges come with external strings attached," it said.

The story of Almeida's twitter spat with Zhao Lijian, charge d'affaires at the Chinese embassy in Islamabad provided fodder to "malign" Pakistan-China relations, it said.

"Pakistan and China have to build a united front through institutional framework to counter this negative campaign. Both countries also need to focus on formulating public opinion, which implies cooperation with news agencies and networks," it said.
 
.
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/589983/pakistan-approved-russias-request-use.html

Pakistan has approved Russia's request to use Gwadar port in Balochistan being developed by China under the USD 46 billion CPEC, an article in the state- run media said today, notwithstanding the denial of Russian Embassy in Islamabad.

"The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), as a flagship project of the One Belt and One Road (OBOR) initiative, has drawn a great deal of investments," the article in Global Times said.

"Apart from the fact that Pakistan has approved a Russian request for using the Gwadar Port, located in Balochistan Province, for its exports, media reports were swirling that Russia planned to merge the Moscow-led Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) with the CPEC," the article titled 'Russia can be a welcoming presence at CPEC' said.

"Although the Russian embassy in Islamabad later denied the reports, concerns and speculations have been lingering among some observers," it said.

"It isn't something terrible if Moscow joins the CPEC. Instead, it will be an opportunity for China, Russia and Pakistan to enhance cooperation," the article said, adding that Moscow's participation will have a positive impact on India.

"India has been opposed to the CPEC due to the long-term tension between New Delhi and Islamabad, and its historical border disputes with China. Traditionally, Russia has developed a very good relationship with India, as well as China and Pakistan," the article said.

Russia's presence in the CPEC would help prevent the international community, including India, from paying excessive attention to China and remove the unnecessary worries over the so-called China threat. The cooperation between BRICS countries like China, Russia and India is the key to the success of OBOR development, it said.

"As was said above, Russia's participation is not a bad thing and there is no need to exaggerate neither its competition nor negativity. On the contrary, if Russia joins the project, it will be a stakeholder which shares economic risk, especially security risk, and has the same or similar goals. It's a good thing," it said.
 
.
China communist leaders ideology and thinking is leading into an IMPERIALIST POWER. The Silk Road enunciated by Chinese leaders is similar to British EAST INDIA COMPANY: first go for a trading post, get involved in placing a Ruler of State friendly to one's country and little by little annex it by political or economic means : eventually becomes China's client state leading to lost of virginity and sovereignty. A good example Japanese imperialist war on China-during these time the Chinese population lost their virginity and sovereignty and today China is demanding compensation for such lost of ......
 
.
In that sense China was divided after Qing fell. All previous empires before PRC were also empires, not countries.

China's history is very different from India's. India's history was far more dynamic, foreign invasions used to last hundreds of years and fighting was constant. India was richer and had more people in a significantly smaller area of land. Otoh, Chinese kings rarely put up a fight, so division of China was less in frequency, not to mention the millennia of isolation.

The fact is all Indians today identify themselves with India.

The British tried dividing India before they left, they partly succeeded with Pakistan, but British India was nowhere as united as today's India is.

This was British Raj.

India-princely-states.gif


The British constantly pit kingdoms against each other, that's why they lasted that long. There were nearly 600 kingdoms during British rule. That's why we have the Kashmir conflict.

Republic of India has no kingdoms. It's truly united.

I don't know why it is constantly repeated, but India was nowhere near being united under British rule.

Bs, we had the same language 2000 years ago, how many languages do u have. U even have to borrow masters language English as an official unified language, pathetic comparing India to China in nation building
 
.
The British constantly pit kingdoms against each other, that's why they lasted that long.

You are pulling that out of your ***.

There were nearly 600 kingdoms during British rule. That's why we have the Kashmir conflict.

Everything was under British control. The Monarch's only ruled on behalf of the British. They were not really independent states - and they knew it.

---

This is the real British Raj before partition.

history02.jpg
 
.
Back
Top Bottom