China’s border row with India has misfired, says regional security expert

[GR!FF!N]

Jetti is saying that India is compose of states that speak a different language with regional culture. and the similarities are more in the line of European states vs US states.

nope..I'm sorry.your wrong.regional language can't be a scale on which you measure your country.India is a versatile country.and for language,only Bengali,my mother tongue has various different dialects,some are so different than others that you can call them different "Language".thats barely matter.

 

[Srinivas]

LOL India should not trust in Yankees, America changes side very frequently. Once China become superpower , America will started taking side of China, even may offer China lets go we together rule the world.

Who gives a Damn , China or USA ...., Super power or regional power.

Indian is going to rule S.Asia and IOR

for our little "Expert on Indian History" chinese member,I'm posting the same link like,20th times..please read and educate...

Political integration of India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

These guys don't understand logic and reasoning, they say what their CCP is asked to say and post one more post the same material again and again like they earn money.

 

[Tshering22]

LOL India should not trust in Yankees, America changes side very frequently. Once China become superpower , America will started taking side of China, even may offer China lets go we together rule the world.

We have dealt with a rather hostile America before.


Don't worry, this isn't about trust; it is about mutual convenience.


We have a problem, US agrees so it gives us something, we give them something; Simple.


Tomorrow when they part ways, we will find a way for ourselves.


Countries don't function like individuals.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

India was actually taken over, it's sovereignty threatened, did the Princely states, bind together? No I'm afraid, it takes far more than Threats to bind nations together. It takes leaders and people who are willing to be team players.

It's a lot harder than it sounds, you been in teams I assume?

Nationalism didn't exist in that age,nor did advanced communications.In the words of napoleon-
''Only 2 things unite men,fear and interest''

 

[Nisha]

This "expert" is either stupid or just blind.

Back in the warring states in China. 7 states exist. One is the eventual ruling state, Qin. The other six attempted an Alliance to bring down Qin through an masterful politician called Su Qin.

The Alliance on paper was stronger, but each individually was much weaker. The Qin politician used his diplomacy skills to dissolve the alliance and paved the way to eventual unification by Qin.

He used the common mistrust, the weakness of the weaker states, and used bribes, and other means to stop a few other nations. The Alliance collapsed before it even did anything meaningful.

The 6 states, were much like Europe in the sense they had much in common, as well as differences. The proposed alliance by this author has nothing, and much like BRICS, there power, interest and everything else has pretty much nothing in common, and even worse, some of these countries are developed or soon to be developed like SK, Japan and Australia, while some are pretty low on the food chain.

Moral of the story, unlike Nato where US is the undisputed leader and has command over all Allied forces, there isn't and won't be a command structure that would work in a India Japan + whatever.

India won't listen to Japanese command, and I know the Japanese won't listen to Indians, Vietnam and Philippines also won't listen to another's command, while Australia and Indonesia has at least some bad feelings, from my understanding.

With out an effective Chain of command, a mistrust between the countries, economic interests with China as well as countries friendly with China, European and American interests with China and other countries.

All these things are things that would doom any alliance against China. All China has to do is offer unification for South Korea, negotiate with Vietnam and Philippines on a common ground (they won't really want to go to war with China so the end result is irrelevent, all it needs is to delay or stop them from taking action) and the way US China trade is going, US will do all it could to hold back Japan.

India, let's face it won't move alone, Australia loves Chinese Yuan, while Indonesia, Malaysia somehow seems indifferent to the SCS issue.


No there won't be an Anti China Alliance

Thank you so much. YOu just provided vital clues as to what to look for, what to correct and what to strengthen. Couldn;t have done it without you...thank you!

 

[Jayanta]

LOL India should not trust in Yankees, America changes side very frequently. Once China become superpower , America will started taking side of China, even may offer China lets go we together rule the world.

Just watch this video to understand:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BvHrp6zePU

Note: Please ignore the and the second part of the video and concentrate of the first part.

 

[Killswitch]

Thank you PRC... forcing the southblock slackers into action!

 

[sincity]

Indian use Japan in hope to win concession from the Chinese government, they are fool to think China worry about Indian alignment with Japanese will have any impact on China rise. US the world economic and the world military power still couldn't contain China rise. Even Indian jump into the phrase of China containment won't make any different to the Chinese.

 

[faithfulguy]

Well, ther is only a similarity of the EU analogy. the reality is still that inidia is a soverign country and a very unique one at that.

Of course India is a country. But India would not be a country if Britain did not invade and united India. And if that is the case and given that no one else united India, than India would compose of many countries like western Europe. So your analogy of Western Europe with India is right on. But because of British imperialism, India is now one country.

 

[Bang Galore]

Of course India is a country. But India would not be a country if Britain did not invade and united India. And if that is the case and given that no one else united India, than India would compose of many countries like western Europe. So your analogy of Western Europe with India is right on. But because of British imperialism, India is now one country.

That's an opinion, not an invalid one to hold. Still completely irrelevant to any discussion on India as a state in 2013. We were a lot of things before that we are not now. We are a lot of things now that we weren't before.

 

[jetti]

Of course India is a country. But India would not be a country if Britain did not invade and united India. And if that is the case and given that no one else united India, than India would compose of many countries like western Europe. So your analogy of Western Europe with India is right on. But because of British imperialism, India is now one country.

not true thatno one else united India. It was united for a century at least under mauryas (exclude deep south bu include areas in afghanistan, pak etc.. but for sake of argument assume it was united). The culture was a buddhist/hindu culture where buddhism was predominant.
however with the advent of muslims, they destroyed buddhism thinking it was hinduism.
Of course the conscience of India as we know it today was not there. So today's India is a unique blend of cultures bound together by common pagan religious beliefs.
I agree that todays india, pak, BD, Burma are all constructs of British imperialism. I think that is one of the few positives of britis rule, but they have extracted an unacceptable price for it.

 

[faithfulguy]

not true thatno one else united India. It was united for a century at least under mauryas (exclude deep south bu include areas in afghanistan, pak etc.. but for sake of argument assume it was united). The culture was a buddhist/hindu culture where buddhism was predominant.
however with the advent of muslims, they destroyed buddhism thinking it was hinduism.
Of course the conscience of India as we know it today was not there. So today's India is a unique blend of cultures bound together by common pagan religious beliefs.
I agree that todays india, pak, BD, Burma are all constructs of British imperialism. I think that is one of the few positives of britis rule, but they have extracted an unacceptable price for it.

Actually, Burma was already a kingdom before the coming of the British. It was a kingdom in its own right. India, on the other hand, was not a kingdom, but compose of a lot of kingdom.

For example, if the same British also occupied Thailand, Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam and call it IndoChina. After WWII, IndoChina chose to become a country compose of different states that speak different language with English as the language that unify them. Than they would be in the same situation as India today.

 

[jetti]

Actually, Burma was already a kingdom before the coming of the British. It was a kingdom in its own right. India, on the other hand, was not a kingdom, but compose of a lot of kingdom.

For example, if the same British also occupied Thailand, Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam and call it IndoChina. After WWII, IndoChina chose to become a country compose of different states that speak different language with English as the language that unify them. Than they would be in the same situation as India today.

Agreed... now I dont know what point we are discussing about.

 

[faithfulguy]

Agreed... now I dont know what point we are discussing about.

Thanks for agreeing with me. Its just refreshing for an Indian to agree with me on this. Most Indians believe that India has always been one country throughout its history. The small kingdoms are just an aberration and a small part of India's history. Its difficult for me to share basic fact as I'm not India and they feel insulted when I share the truth.

 

[jetti]

Thanks for agreeing with me. Its just refreshing for an Indian to agree with me on this. Most Indians believe that India has always been one country throughout its history. The small kingdoms are just an aberration and a small part of India's history. Its difficult for me to share basic fact as I'm not India and they feel insulted when I share the truth.

the modern country is a very european concept imo. the region called india, pak ,bd was bound together by various dharmic beliefs (buddhism being one of them). so south asia originally had a dharmic philosophy which kind of loosely brought people on the same plane. then after muslimes invaded a lot of thngs changed and so did political structure. after british came western concept was introduced. I am sure it s the same with china as well, in the sense there would not have been a country called china but only kingdoms???