In what I have said below, it is important to realise that there is a solid bloc of people in India who wish for peace with China, but a just peace, not a peace that has not yet been offered. After reading your post, it seems to me that many of the events that may have seemed impressive to you are not so impressive if they are taken into time sequence.
Above all, if you want to discuss peace, it is helpful to do it without thinking that the people you are talking to are idiots with no background or no experience.
You do remember China offered a deal on China-India border issues, 3 times offered in history.
I am aware of the offers made by Chou En Lai, not of any others. These were made before the border conflicts of 1962, and never repeated. Until today, to date, China has never, even once, explained what her territorial borders should be, or on what legacy these were based; the only positions taken have been based on the original extent of Chinese penetration in 1962, positions vacated by China herself, but revived after many decades, compromising the mutually agreed modes of coexistence on the borders.
President Xi visited India, and vice versa many times since Modi took in charge.
Again, there was no indication, either from India, Indian media, from China, from Chinese media about any kind of settlement proposed.
IK extended olive branches the day he became PM.
Those were uniformly of the type that if all their requirements were met, peace would be possible.
India can hold out olive branches to China in that fashion.
If China withdraws from Tibet, and removes troops from Gansu and Qing Hai, we can sign a peace treaty for 500 years.
China gave green light to both Pakistan and India on joining Shanghai Cooperation Organization.
China and Pakistan started CPEC, and some other projects, which offered India to join in.
Frankly, as far as the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation is concerned, its utility has to be explained. That was originally to demilitarise the Central Asian region, and to work together to reduce terrorism. India has continuously been under terrorist attack, after joining the organisation in 2017; India's efforts at getting UN identification of known terrorists from a neighbouring country have been repeatedly blocked by China. As for de-militarisation, what happened is there in front of the whole world to see.
India is invited into and an official member of BRICS, which is the new IMF.
India has one of the largest share of voting power of AIIB, which is the new World Bank. Pakistan is member too.
Both true, but what has that got to do with peace between India and her neighbours? We have peaceful relations with five of our neighbours, difficulties with two others, and those two have difficulties with all their neighbours, with one exception, in one case, and with the entire community of south east Asian nations, some openly, some muted due to fear and due to dependence, in the other case.
I think in China world view, peace among Pakistan, China and India is the best solution for all 3 parties, and there is a position for India in the new world order.
That is wonderful. When it is put into practice, we will stop holding our collective breath.
When you stop building up military forces on our borders, we may take these thoughts seriously.
What's the world order Yankees offered to India? QUAD. While QUAD is new NATO.
True.
This was after the aggressive behaviour that was displayed by China, so the question arises, did China foresee friction with the US over Taiwan, and did China foresee QUAD, and did China for that reason behave with such aggression on the Indian borders?
And AUKUS, which excluded India. Which means in Yankees world view, India is at most second tier countries.
Perhaps.
India does not wish to be a first tier defence partner with anybody. India wishes to be free to procure arms and weapons from any source, without restriction; if the other side presents that freedom under their own formula, why should India bother?
In Doklam stand-off, China is very much restrained.
On the contrary; while a temporary respite was forced on China, thereafter she has gone back to infrastructure building and to encroaching without any let-up.
After Galwan Valley conflicts and Ukraine crisis, it's very clear that India is on your own. QUAD is not backing India anyway.
It appears that we are looking at things in a timeless universe. QUAD was never offered before the Galwan Valley conflicts; whatever had to be done was done by India in isolation, and it will remain like that. No foreign troops or foreign military presence, except permission to use our airports and sea ports for transit, has ever been in India after 1947.
India is in fever of extreme nationalism and victim delusions, as well as fancy of west support, which is just hot air.
Correct on the first one, but beyond that, those who are not extreme nationalists continue to distrust Chinese motives and intentions. Western support was never our criterion, otherwise India was pressingly invited to get involved in the wars on Iraq, and in the war on Afghanistan, and refused.
You need to get your sequences of events sorted, also your views on your country's leadership.