Beijing, New Delhi poised for closer ties - China daily

[Chinese-Dragon]

I knew I will draw you in this discussion.

being friendly with America is more better than with India and russia in the long term.

Hilarious, do you also support American BS propaganda against Russia in Ukraine too?

China and Russia are the ONLY real threats to American global hegemony in the next few decades.

"Being friendly with America is better than being friendly with Russia"? Even Americans don't believe this propaganda.

And they know it too, hence their desperate attempts to play divide and conquer again. Too bad no one is falling for it, check how Xi Jinping and Putin are getting along.

 

[Okemos]

US can be a good friend?

Let me see, you love America and hate the CCP. How long have you been living in America?

How many American military bases are surrounding China, and how many Chinese military bases are surrounding America?

America is the global hegemon, they are the only ones with the capability and intention to contain us, and they have been actively doing so. America's desire to hold on to their global hegemony is the exact opposite of China's stated goal to have a multipolar world.

All you are doing is personal attack . Listen, emotionally I prefer India over Pakistan or the US, since I'm a Buddhist and India is a peace loving nation in general. But I know what's important in international politics, which is national interest in long term.

Russia ceded more land areas from China than any other countries. Deny it or not, the US has no interest in Chinese territory. I don't care about ideologies; I only care how today's policies will affect future generation. There is nothing wrong to let the US spend money and energy maintaining world order, unless the Chinese are willing to send ships all over the world.

What China should do now is let the US take care of the rest of the world, while China take care of our territories and secure natural resources.

Again I'm believer of Art of Wars and wisdoms of our past great thinkers. Your close neighbor always poses greater threat than distant ones.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

All you are doing is personal attack . Listen, emotionally I prefer India over Pakistan or the US, since I'm a Buddhist and India is a peace loving nation in general. But I know what's important in international politics, which is national interest in long term.

Russia ceded more land areas from China than any other countries. Deny it or not, the US has no interest in Chinese territory. I don't care about ideologies; I only care how today's policies will affect future generation. There is nothing wrong to let the US spend money and energy maintaining world order, unless the Chinese are willing to send ships all over the world.

What China should do now is let the US take care of the rest of the world, while China take care of our territories and secure natural resources.

Again I'm believer of Art of Wars and wisdoms of our past great thinkers. Your close neighbor always poses greater threat than distant ones.

So how come the Chinese government is doing the opposite?

Oh right, you hate the CCP and think their strategy is stupid.

I used to think your dislike of the CCP had to do with Chinese nationalism, hence I never took issue with it.

But it seems you are advocating for America instead. I don't know what you learned living in America, but logically the rise of China is the greatest long term threat to American global hegemony.

You think they are just going to sit back and let my country grow powerful? No, they are going to surround us and try to contain us, like they have been doing for decades already.

They have surrounded us on all sides with American military bases, is this your basis for some kind of "friendship"?

We are chipping away at the foundations of American global hegemony, starting with the dollar. It is ridiculous for America to believe that we would submit to their hegemony in our own back yard.

Your close neighbor always poses greater threat than distant ones.

You think America is "distant"?

Have you taken a look around China in any direction? They are not distant, they are all around us.

 

[kalu_miah]

@Chinese-Dragon I respect your opinion on most other issues, but on this particular issue I agree more with @bolo , here is my reasoning:

1. Size of population under their control helped US and allies win against Germany or Japan
2. Size of population helped Russia win against Germany

Now the war moves from shooting war to economic war:

3. Size of population is helping China's rise and topple US from the top spot
4. Size of population will help India to topple China, unless:

China creates an integrated alliance in Asia of 3 billion people, that will exclude India. Helping Indian rise too quickly before Asian integration under Chinese leadership, may be a money maker for some rich dudes, owners of POE, but will bring disaster for China and rest of Asia.

So the question is not about choosing the US as a friend or enemy, rather the question is about choosing whether you should invest money with China friendly nations and make the same amount and create a great future geostrategic long term future for China and their allies, or whether you should invest money with a potential competitor and rival who will topple you in the long run, just like you are toppling the US today. By 2050, India will have a population of 1.6 billion, whereas China will remain at 1.3 billion.

I think border dispute is least of a factor in this. Nor the fact that India borders with China is a great factor in this.

Also, because of much smaller population size, neither the US, nor Russia will be great power rivals of China in the long run, the way India has the potentials to be, once they rise sufficiently.

 

[bolo]

Hilarious, do you also support American BS propaganda against Russia in Ukraine too?

China and Russia are the ONLY real threats to American global hegemony in the next few decades.

"Being friendly with America is better than being friendly with Russia"? Even Americans don't believe this propaganda.

And they know it too, hence their desperate attempts to play divide and conquer again. Too bad no one is falling for it, check how Xi Jinping and Putin are getting along.

LOL what, did you mean to say Indians? From what I know, India has the second largest Muslim population on the planet.



We do so much business with America (our major rival) as well as Japan (our historic enemy).

Yet investing in India is the problem? I am glad Chinese leaders don't listen to this sort of pro-American BS.



What a joke, I don't think even Americans believe this kind of crap.

Though I understand American apprehension at the idea of BRICS, and specifically the Russia-China part of it.

ok, i may have been a little zealous with [becoming friendlier with US, i admit]. The whole point is this. US and other developed invested a lot of FDI in the early 80s to "prop up China". they were thinking the same thing that Chinese are thinking about India now, a potential huge market with 1 billion people. 30 years later, US want to pivot Asia but find it hard to do as China is no longer the weakling like the 80s. US is losing its dominant.

Could the US foresee a developed China so quickly, and did they foresee China will be a challenge to their hegemon? China want to do th same thing now in India. Your argument is, China does not want to be a hegemon or Indians not as smart as Chinese to build up in 30 years, or China will be much stronger in 30 years. The point being, the US could have an easier time containing China in the 80s then now. With development, India will be stronger and can close the gap with China. Chinese may be peaceful, do you think a strong India will be? Ask Bangladesh and Pakistanis.

Throughout the ages countless Chinese emperors have made this error. The thinking they are superior to the rest of the world and need not to expand or build colonies. Even to the point of having blue prints of the latest weapons, military vessels, etc written in a set of encyclopedias for all to see, LOL. After Qing, China was lucky to be intact given the military tech gap btw west and China. Wait until India has MIRV nuclear arsenal, you will see their true colours

 

[Tshering22]

If the news has it right, our PM's MEA time table is already packed.

1- Flying to Bhutan
2- Expecting Chinese president as a guest here.
3- Flying to Brazil for BRICS.
4- Flying to Japan.
5- Flying to US in September
6- Flying to Russia for our annual bilateral summit.

 

[mahesh.]

ok, i may have been a little zealous with [becoming friendlier with US, i admit]. The whole point is this. US and other developed invested a lot of FDI in the early 80s to "prop up China". they were thinking the same thing that Chinese are thinking about India now, a potential huge market with 1 billion people. 30 years later, US want to pivot Asia but find it hard to do as China is no longer the weakling like the 80s. US is losing its dominant.

Could the US foresee a developed China so quickly, and did they foresee China will be a challenge to their hegemon? China want to do th same thing now in India. Your argument is, China does not want to be a hegemon or Indians not as smart as Chinese to build up in 30 years, or China will be much stronger in 30 years. The point being, the US could have an easier time containing China in the 80s then now. With development, India will be stronger and can close the gap with China. Chinese may be peaceful, do you think a strong India will be? Ask Bangladesh and Pakistanis.

Throughout the ages countless Chinese emperors have made this error. The thinking they are superior to the rest of the world and need not to expand or build colonies. Even to the point of having blue prints of the latest weapons, military vessels, etc written in a set of encyclopedias for all to see, LOL. After Qing, China was lucky to be intact given the military tech gap btw west and China. Wait until India has MIRV nuclear arsenal, you will see their true colours

A strong India is good for the world. Which is why no one is concerned about India developing or nuclear India or India developing missiles. India never attacked any country and we have no intention of doing so. Even our own people will reject the thought of attacking any country. All we need is peace, development and reduction of poverty in our country.
So in your view China should not help India because it might be a problem for China after 30 years or so..?

 

[conworldus]

o worked for the princely state of Kashmir. In his survey in 1865,he put Aksai China within the boundary of Kashmir. This boundary was later called Johnson Ardagh line along the crest of Kun Lun mountains in Aksai China.
Sino-Indian boundary dispute is actually three folded. One in the north west (Ladakh/Aksai China), the middle sector (Himachal/Uttar Pradesh with Tibet) and the third in South East( NEFA).All three are entangled with each other and specially the disputes in Northern sector and South Eastern sectors are remarkably intertwined with each other. In 1960, Zhou Enlai offered a status quo in which he offered us to have NEFA and in return he wanted India to reject its ludicrous claim on the basis of Johnson Ardagh line which we did not agree. India claimed Aksai China as an integral part of it within its pious border which had no historical merit at all. If we accepted China's offer then perhaps we coul

A strong India is good for the world. Which is why no one is concerned about India developing or nuclear India or India developing missiles. India never attacked any country and we have no intention of doing so. Even our own people will reject the thought of attacking any country. All we need is peace, development and reduction of poverty in our country.
So in your view China should not help India because it might be a problem for China after 30 years or so..?

India has historically maintained a non-align policy and I don't see it change any time soon. A strong India serves the interest of a multi-polar world precisely because of its non-align culture. I don't see India ever perpetuating itself to kiss up to the US no matter how much weapon the US sells to India.

Now, what China wants is a multi-polar world, and what the US wants is global hegemony. I see India having more common interest with China in this perspective. Clearing all the smokes and mirrors of recent maritime disputes China is engaged in, the fundamental issue is that, the US is trying hard to contain China's rise to protect its hegemony, and small nations are acting on behalf of Washington's policies.

A weak Indian government, in this perspective, is bad for China and for itself. A weak India has a hard time maintaining a strong governance, and can succumb to the US influence more easily to be used to contain China. It is not good for China to have a nuclear armed hostile neighbor with a billion people.

Also, the US would at the same time suppress India's own development, because a developed India will INEVITABLY challenge the US dominance in the India Ocean, especially the strategically important Middle East. A strong Indian navy is the last thing the US wants to see (all that argument about freedom of ocean passage, right?)

My conclusion is that, yes, for its own sake, China should help India, because this is a important part of China's vision of a multipolar world.

 

[bolo]

@Chinese-Dragon I respect your opinion on most other issues, but on this particular issue I agree more with @bolo , here is my reasoning:

1. Size of population under their control helped US and allies win against Germany or Japan
2. Size of population helped Russia win against Germany

Now the war moves from shooting war to economic war:

3. Size of population is helping China's rise and topple US from the top spot
4. Size of population will help India to topple China, unless:

China creates an integrated alliance in Asia of 3 billion people, that will exclude India. Helping Indian rise too quickly before Asian integration under Chinese leadership, may be a money maker for some rich dudes, owners of POE, but will bring disaster for China and rest of Asia.

So the question is not about choosing the US as a friend or enemy, rather the question is about choosing whether you should invest money with China friendly nations and make the same amount and create a great future geostrategic long term future for China and their allies, or whether you should invest money with a potential competitor and rival who will topple you in the long run, just like you are toppling the US today. By 2050, India will have a population of 1.6 billion, whereas China will remain at 1.3 billion.

I think border dispute is least of a factor in this. Or the fact that India borders with China is a great factor in this.

Also, because of much smaller population size, neither the US, nor Russia will be great power rivals of China in the long run, the way India has the potentials to be, once they rise sufficiently.

I'll agree with you that the mulit polar new world does not need to include India as I think that once they become powerful as China is at present, they can potentially cause instability for the world.

As it stands right now, Russia and China is a good partnership. (see my post below). I was just a little too over zealous thinking China would be better off with the US in my previous post. @Chinese_Dragon prefer business with any country, I disagree with him. My post #65 address this.

He forgot to mention that China does business with US and Japan because in the early economic development of China, US and Japan had invested sizable $$ into China's economy. The business right now is due to convenience and the US has too much money invested in China to just pull the plug.

China should take this as a lesson and not try to push for develpment in India. Half the world are still poor, Africa is still not developed yet . I rather China develp Africa than India.

 

[kalu_miah]

ok, i may have been a little zealous with [becoming friendlier with US, i admit]. The whole point is this. US and other developed invested a lot of FDI in the early 80s to "prop up China". they were thinking the same thing that Chinese are thinking about India now, a potential huge market with 1 billion people. 30 years later, US want to pivot Asia but find it hard to do as China is no longer the weakling like the 80s. US is losing its dominant.

Could the US foresee a developed China so quickly, and did they foresee China will be a challenge to their hegemon? China want to do th same thing now in India. Your argument is, China does not want to be a hegemon or Indians not as smart as Chinese to build up in 30 years, or China will be much stronger in 30 years. The point being, the US could have an easier time containing China in the 80s then now. With development, India will be stronger and can close the gap with China. Chinese may be peaceful, do you think a strong India will be? Ask Bangladesh and Pakistanis.

Throughout the ages countless Chinese emperors have made this error. The thinking they are superior to the rest of the world and need not to expand or build colonies. Even to the point of having blue prints of the latest weapons, military vessels, etc written in a set of encyclopedias for all to see, LOL. After Qing, China was lucky to be intact given the military tech gap btw west and China. Wait until India has MIRV nuclear arsenal, you will see their true colours

Excellent post, I have been trying to make the exact same point here in this post:
Abe's Strategy: Rearrange Region's Power Balance | Page 14

And I provide a solution and road map for China here:
Abe's Strategy: Rearrange Region's Power Balance | Page 19

There may not be an EU in Asia, but it is possible to expand the SCO as a military alliance and cover most willing Asian nations except India. And those who are willing to join this new military alliance, Chinese investments should go to only these countries. Potentially there are at least 1.7 billion people in these Asian nations, much bigger than the population of India, where much more money can be made. Almost every one of these nations is more efficient than India:

Global Hunger Index | International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)

The only thing India has going for it is its size and its fantastic ability to deceive.

After these allied Asian nations, the next in priority for investment should be Sub-saharan Africa and Latin America. Arabs have their own money for investing in Arab League nations.

There is no need for a BRICs alliance to break hegemony of US, the fading away of US has already started and it will only accelerate every passing year. Helping India because of BRICs alliance will only set up China to make the exact same mistake the US did just a few decades back.

 

[he-man]

Excellent post, I have been trying to make the exact same point here in this post:
Abe's Strategy: Rearrange Region's Power Balance | Page 14

And I provide a solution and road map for China here:
Abe's Strategy: Rearrange Region's Power Balance | Page 19

There may not be an EU in Asia, but it is possible to expand the SCO as a military alliance and cover most willing Asian nations except India. And those who are willing to join this new military alliance, Chinese investments should go to only these countries. Potentially there is at least 1.7 billion people in these Asian nations, much bigger than the population of India, where much more money can be made. Almost every one of these nations is more efficient than India. The only thing India has going for is its size and its fantastic ability to deceive. After these allied Asian nations, the next in priority should be Sub-saharan Africa and Latin America.

There is no need for a BRICs alliance to break hegemony of US, the fading away of US has already started and it will only accelerate every passing year. Helping India because of BRICs alliance will only set up China to make the exact same mistake the US did just a few decades back.

there is no alternative to india when china slows down post 2020 which it will,india will have the cheapest and largest workforce in asia equivalent to many countries combined together.

people can do whatever they want to deter us,but just like usa couldn't do jack about rise of china,same way china won't be able to slow us down.
we have the advantage of population going in favour of us till 2060 ,we just need to shore up the infrastructure and power generation and there we will be growing at 8-9 percent again

 

[kalu_miah]

there is no alternative to india when china slows down post 2020 which it will,india will have the cheapest and largest workforce in asia equivalent to many countries combined together.

people can do whatever they want to deter us,but just like usa couldn't do jack about rise of china,same way china won't be able to slow us down.
we have the advantage of population going in favour of us till 2060 ,we just need to shore up the infrastructure and power generation and there we will be growing at 8-9 percent again

I have never said that India can be stopped from growing and developing eventually, the question we are debating is whether China should help and contribute in that process and expedite that process and whether such help towards India will be in Chinese geo-strategic interest.

 

[Arya Desa]

Are all Chinese of the mindset of bolo or is it just a case of the loud and stupid drowning out the sane voices?

I have never said that India can be stopped from growing and developing eventually, the question we are debating is whether China should help and contribute in that process and expedite that process and whether such help towards India will be in Chinese geo-strategic interest.

I can't wait till we finish our wall. No longer will we be flooded by lungis, and South Asia will finally have peace.

 

[kalu_miah]

Are all Chinese of the mindset of bolo or is it just a case of the loud and stupid drowning out the sane voices?



I can't wait till we finish our wall. No longer will we be flooded by lungis, and South Asia will finally have peace.

India is more hungry than Bangladesh, why should Bangladeshi's go into a more hungry country than their own?

Global Hunger Index | International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)

 

[he-man]

I have never said that India can be stopped from growing and developing eventually, the question we are debating is whether China should help and contribute in that process and expedite that process and whether such help towards India will be in Chinese geo-strategic interest.

china has no option,it has to invest the money where returns are best and there is no country that can compete with india in this respect except for china itself right now.

other countries are either too small or have a puny workforce and won't sustain growth for long unlike india.

also we will eventually get the funding from japan and usa as tensions between china and west rise which they will post 2020 looking at chinese expansion of its armed forces.
one was or the other we are gonna get the fdi,,,,,,the thing to look for is whether china will help us or will look us as an enemy.