China wants to boost Bangladesh economy

[extra terrestrial]

SCO is not going to be a regional union like ASEAN or Eurasion Union (led by Russia). As soon as China becomes a peer power to the US in 15-20 years, they will be ready to end their policy of Nonintervention:
Can Nonintervention-ist East Asian states reign in an Intervention-ist India?
and start a NATO like military alliance in Asia, using the SCO as the starting platform. We will be in the first batch to join this alliance.

As for the dispute resolution regarding Rohingya refugees between Bangladesh and Myanmar, it has to be done under the supervision of China, ASEAN and OIC, long before that time. Although Myanmar is currently being wooed by the US and India is helping that effort, I believe Myanmar will not burn its bridges with China, it cannot afford to. So in the long term both Myanmar and Bangladesh will turn out to be in the China led camp, and it will be good to resolve our differences sooner than later. For Bangladesh to pick a fight with Myanmar will always help anti-China interest and I don't think we should support India backed Awami Leagues tendency to promote this kind of anti-China and pro-India interest for the long term interest of our nation.

China indeed can play an influential role in resolving the dispute between Bangladesh and Myanmar, but what I'm saying is that before having such an institution like you proposed, the member states must have their disputes resolved. If not, then there should be a room for resolving the dispute within SCO's scope. Besides, it's not only Bangladesh and Myanmar, there are major issues between China and Japan, the two Koreas and so on. If these issues remain unresolved, it would make no sense to expect the member states to cooperate with each other in such sensitive issues like defence and national security.

 

[kalu_miah]

China indeed can play an influential role in resolving the dispute between Bangladesh and Myanmar, but what I'm saying is that before having such an institution like you proposed, the member states must have their disputes resolved. If not, then there should be a room for resolving the dispute within SCO's scope. Besides, it's not only Bangladesh and Myanmar, there are major issues between China and Japan, the two Koreas and so on. If these issues remain unresolved, it would make no sense to expect the member states to cooperate with each other in such sensitive issues like defence and national security.

Yes you are in the right direction. Conflict resolution is a major incentive for alliance setups, such as NATO and regional unions like EU. So conflicts will be resolved over time and these multi-state institutions will become vehicles for these conflict resolution between member nations.

Japan and South Korea will not be in the first batch. But I would expect China helping more with Korean unification in the coming years as current pro-US Saenuri party loses election to the pro-Korean opposition, through the expansion of the Sunshine policy of unification pioneered by Kim Dae-jung (the founder of the current opposition party alliance), by having more EPZ's like Kaesong Industrial complex. A decades long gradual unification process will then reduce the justification for US base in South Korea and help their departure, which will then prompt the unified Korea to join the China led SCO.

Japan as an island nation and the most hostile to China historically and due to atrocities in WW II, will engage economically, but will remain as US ally and a part of security structure with Australia, India, Vietnam and Philippines, trying to create a sort of Asian Nato. China is investing in India heavily trying to lure them away from this Pivot to Asia and India will never fully commit to it to get benefit from China, but the other nations mentioned above will. But some decades far in the future, Japan, I hope and expect, will join the China led security structure, once they feel that this will ensure their safety and security more than staying with the US, which will by that time become no longer the lone super power, but just one two great powers, the US (the leader of NATO) and China (the leader of most Asian nations). The US bases in Japan will be removed at this point.

The thing to remember is that US will be happy to leave Asia, if Asian countries can resolve their differences and ensure their own mutual security. Many in the US realize that the time is coming when the world will not depend on the US to ensure security in distant parts of the world as local nations develop and form their own local groups for mutual security and conflict resolution.

 

[Audio]

lol, so many words.

Lets paint a real picture here.

Your by far top export partner and a source of foreign currency is EU. Chinese only want to sell their cheap products to you, while they import precious little from Bangladesh.

But oh well, you are Asians. All wishes and no clear rationale.

Page 9

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2006/september/tradoc_113349.pdf

For 2012
Imports from China: close to 5 bill.$
Exports to China: 245 mill.$

Imports from EU: 1.5bill.$
Exports to EU: close to 8 bill.$

I think your government won't be so quick in forgetting who is paying you the most.

 

[UKBengali]

Yes but the most rapid growth is happening to Asia.

China is wanting to move its textile factories to BD and then import the products back into its home market, since Chinese labour costs are getting too high now.

 

[kalu_miah]

lol, so many words.

Lets paint a real picture here.

Your by far top export partner and a source of foreign currency is EU. Chinese only want to sell their cheap products to you, while they import precious little from Bangladesh.

But oh well, you are Asians. All wishes and no clear rationale.

Page 9

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2006/september/tradoc_113349.pdf

For 2012
Imports from China: close to 5 bill.$
Exports to China: 245 mill.$

Imports from EU: 1.5bill.$
Exports to EU: close to 8 bill.$

I think your government won't be so quick in forgetting who is paying you the most.

Are you referring to my post above? We are talking about future plans and future projections, nothing to do with the present. Will you make us part of NATO and EU?

 

[extra terrestrial]

Yes you are in the right direction. Conflict resolution is a major incentive for alliance setups, such as NATO and regional unions like EU. So conflicts will be resolved over time and these multi-state institutions will become vehicles for these conflict resolution between member nations.

But the point is will the institutions be able to resolve the dispute? Take the South China Sea dispute as an example. Will China agree to resolve the dispute through the multinational institutions where there would be risks of being cornered by the South East Asian nations? China would always want to resolve the dispute bilaterally.

Japan and South Korea will not be in the first batch. But I would expect China helping more with Korean unification in the coming years as current pro-US Saenuri party loses election to the pro-Korean opposition, through the expansion of the Sunshine policy of unification pioneered by Kim Dae-jung (the founder of the current opposition party alliance), by having more EPZ's like Kaesong Industrial complex. A decades long gradual unification process will then reduce the justification for US base in South Korea and help their departure, which will then prompt the unified Korea to join the China led SCO.

That's too optimistic in my opinion, I don't think Korean reunification is possible in near future, given its strategic geopolitical location, the great powers will remain active in the Korean affairs. If we really want to see a solution to the crises, all the great powers have to play their part.

Japan as an island nation and the most hostile to China historically and due to atrocities in WW II, will engage economically, but will remain as US ally and a part of security structure with Australia, India, Vietnam and Philippines, trying to create a sort of Asian Nato. China is investing in India heavily trying to lure them away from this Pivot to Asia and India will never fully commit to it to get benefit from China, but the other nations mentioned above will. But some decades far in the future, Japan, I hope and expect, will join the China led security structure, once they feel that this will ensure their safety and security more than staying with the US, which will by that time become no longer the lone super power, but just one two great powers, the US (the leader of NATO) and China (the leader of most Asian nations). The US bases in Japan will be removed at this point.

Possible but would take some time until China and Japan resolves their bilateral disputes and China surpasses US militarily. However, I don't think Asian NATO would ever be materialized. There are proposals by the US and UK to include Japan and Australia into NATO but France and Germany are strictly against it.

The thing to remember is that US will be happy to leave Asia, if Asian countries can resolve their differences and ensure their own mutual security. Many in the US realize that the time is coming when the world will not depend on the US to ensure security in distant parts of the world as local nations develop and form their own local groups for mutual security and conflict resolution.

I agree.

 

[kalu_miah]

But the point is will the institutions be able to resolve the dispute? Take the South China Sea dispute as an example. Will China agree to resolve the dispute through the multinational institutions where there would be risks of being cornered by the South East Asian nations? China would always want to resolve the dispute bilaterally.

That's too optimistic in my opinion, I don't think Korean reunification is possible in near future, given its strategic geopolitical location, the great powers will remain active in the Korean affairs. If we really want to see a solution to the crises, all the great powers have to play their part.

Possible but would take some time until China and Japan resolves their bilateral disputes and China surpasses US militarily. However, I don't think Asian NATO would ever be materialized. There are proposals by the US and UK to include Japan and Australia into NATO but France and Germany are strictly against it.

I agree.

Vietnam, Philippines and Japan for now will not be part of this China led alliance and China is not part of ASEAN, so there is no alternative but to solve these disputes bilaterally with China. These institutions will help resolve disputes between nations that are within the same institution.

About Korean reunification, its not as hopeless as it looks on the surface. Korea was a united country for 1400 years, only during last 7 decades it was divided by the two superpowers after the war as their spheres of influence:
Korean reunification - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Implications
A unified Korea could have great implications for the balance of power in the region, with South Korea already considered by many a regional power.[59]Reunification would give access to cheap labor and abundant natural resources in the North, which, combined with existing technology and capital in the South, would create large economic and military growth potential. According to a study by Goldman Sachs, a unified Korea could have an economy larger than that of Japan by 2050.[60] A unified Korean military would have the largest number of reservists as well as one of the largest numbers of military hackers.[61]

Every country or people look for ways to enhance their power and well being, so if it is in the interest of all Koreans, they will move towards this direction slowly and steadily. South Korea is far too developed to be fooled permanently by outsiders and their agents/traitors working against Korean national interest.

Proposed Asian NATO will be allied with NATO, but not part of NATO. This is the Asian Pivot led by US and includes Japan, Australia, Vietnam and Philippines and their hope is also to rope in India, but India wants to stay neutral/nonaligned. Cunning Indian Chankiyans want to have the cake and eat it too.

 

[Audio]

Are you referring to my post above?

No.

We are talking about future plans and future projections, nothing to do with the present.

They are selling you a story you want to hear, so that you continue to spend the sown €'s on J-7? Frigates? There might be some token investment, just so much that Chinese here can post links and Bangladeshi's can thank them, but as far as China is concerned, future plan is to develop it's interior. 7-800 million people are waiting on what 300 million on the coast have.

Will you make us part of NATO and EU?

No, but you got preferential trade partner status, which amounts to reduced taxes, customs etc for products coming from Bangladesh.

 

[kalu_miah]

No.

They are selling you a story you want to hear, so that you continue to spend the sown €'s on J-7? Frigates? There might be some token investment, just so much that Chinese here can post links and Bangladeshi's can thank them, but as far as China is concerned, future plan is to develop it's interior. 7-800 million people are waiting on what 300 million on the coasts have.

No, but you got preferential trade partner status, which amounts to reduced taxes, customs etc for products coming from Bangladesh.

The more China develops, even in its interior, it is good for any of India's immediate neighbors. Huge potential future market for our low value addition manufactured goods.

We have nothing against EU/US or West in general, our main threat comes from India and West is neutral in most India vs. neighbor dynamics, as they are too far away and have nothing to gain by taking sides. But China takes a side as it is also another neighbor and we welcome Chinese participation in neighborhood matters.

 

[Audio]

The more China develops, even in its interior, it is good for any of India's immediate neighbors. Huge potential future market for our low value addition manufactured goods.

This is a very basic view. It's all true but, low added value items are made in China also. And will remain, for quite some time due to the size of population. Difference will only be that Chinese brands like Li Ning will be producing there, instead of foreign brands, like Nike, Adidas etc...

We have nothing against EU/US or West in general, our main threat comes from India and West is neutral in most India vs. neighbor dynamics, as they are too far away and have nothing to gain by taking sides. But China takes a side as it is also another neighbor and we welcome Chinese participation in neighborhood matters.

This is all too confusing. You say India is a threat, in another thread i read about two nation theories and Bangladesh was included in one of the posts. The spirit of that post, which came from a respectable senior member of PDF staff was that your three countries are like long lost brothers.

 

[kalu_miah]

This is all to confusing. You say India is a threat, in another thread i read about two nation theories and Bangladesh was included. The spirit of that post, which came from a respectable senior member of PDF staff was that your three countries are like long lost brothers.

India is a threat because it is a delusional nation that cannot see reality in the face and want to abuse each and every one of its neighbor into submission, just because the British gave them a parting gift, one united large country. Either submit like Nepal, Bhutan, Maldives and Bangladesh or disintegrate like Pakistan, that is India's unwritten goal. Sri Lanka lucked out because its an island and they were able to bring in Chinese help against Indian created and trained terrorist LTTE. My personal estimate it will stay this way for many future generations, at least for 100 years. But the world and countries around it will move on.

The main problem is their inability to come to terms with the fact that Muslims have migrated to this area from outside, ruled and in the process converted many local inhabitants. Do you know why British India was partitioned? Because they did not want to give proportional representation to Muslim populations. So then Jinnah the leader of Muslim League decided to go for partition as the Hindu's could not be trusted to not oppress the Muslims under their majority rule. 67 years later, I agree that he made the right decision. In early life he used to be proponent of Hindu-Muslim unity and united India, but after dealing with Hindu leaders for decades, he understood the reality and changed his mind. I personally went through similar journey and came to this understanding today. It is very difficult to make outsiders understand what Hindu's are like specially towards South Asian Muslims, because to everyone else, they are the nice docile peaceful people. We know their real face, when they have the upper hand. They believe somehow that all of us Muslims are converts from low caste and are traitors to their united Hindu nation, where the reality is quite different. While there are converted people, there are also large number of migrants and their offspring hybrid population, but for some reason they want to completely deny this reality.

I could go on and on, but if you have specific questions you are welcome to ask. In short there is no love lost between India's neighbors and India, be it Hindu, Buddhist or Muslim majority and of course their special wrath is reserved for Muslim Pakistan and Muslim majority Bangladesh, because Muslims ruled over them. But they forget that without Muslim rule, most probably there would not be a united India today. They blame our ancestors for forced conversion and atrocities, but latest historical research shows a completely different reality. Muslim rulers were not even interested to convert people, rather it happened due to missionary work of Muslim Holy men also called Pir or Dervish who settled among people and did social work. You can read more here:
Rise of Islam in Bengal, role of migration

 

[UKBengali]

@Audio : Nice try but economic numbers do not lie. By 2020, even the interior of China will not be able support production of low-tech goods as wages will have gone too high.
Your words mean little when compared with the numbers.

 

[Audio]

@Audio : Nice try but economic numbers do not lie. By 2020, even the interior of China will not be able support production of low-tech goods as wages will have gone too high.
Your words mean little when compared with the numbers.

Where are these numbers? You do know that income inequality is rising in China? You do know that pension in China is 9€'s?

China’s Income Inequality Surpasses U.S., Posing Risk for Xi - Bloomberg

In China, it’s seven times better to be on welfare than to be a pensioner – Quartz

I know you'll say pensions don't matter because pensioners don't work, but it's just used here to demonstrate the gap.

 

[extra terrestrial]

Vietnam, Philippines and Japan for now will not be part of this China led alliance and China is not part of ASEAN, so there is no alternative but to solve these disputes bilaterally with China. These institutions will help resolve disputes between nations that are within the same institution.

In that case, we first need to wait for the disputes get resolved before having such an international institution. If they went on to set up such an institution without resolving the disputes and without keeping any room for resolving the disputes within its scope, it will turn into another SAARC undoubtedly.

About Korean reunification, its not as hopeless as it looks on the surface. Korea was a united country for 1400 years, only during last 7 decades it was divided by the two superpowers after the war as their spheres of influence:
Korean reunification - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Every country or people look for ways to enhance their power and well being, so if it is in the interest of all Koreans, they will move towards this direction slowly and steadily. South Korea is far too developed to be fooled permanently by outsiders and their agents/traitors working against Korean national interest.

Well it does seem hopeless to me, the differences are huge, mostly propagated by the outsiders. The general South Koreans are specially reluctant to the reunification. It would need hundreds of billions of dollars to invest on the under developed parts of North Korea for its economic prosperity, where would they get those money from? Obviously from the tax payers of South Korea.

Proposed Asian NATO will be allied with NATO, but not part of NATO. This is the Asian Pivot led by US and includes Japan, Australia, Vietnam and Philippines and their hope is also to rope in India, but India wants to stay neutral/nonaligned. Cunning Indian Chankiyans want to have the cake and eat it too.

I got the point, but still I don't think Asian NATO would come into being in near future. Besides, countries like Vietnam also expressed their skepticism about US influence over the region, militarily, it's also quite close to Russia.

 

[UKBengali]

Where are these numbers? You do know that income inequality is rising in China? You do know that pension in rural China is 9€'s?

China’s Income Inequality Surpasses U.S., Posing Risk for Xi - Bloomberg

I don't have the link I am on a tablet but Foxconn, that makes iphones, could not find enough workers on the coast and had to move to inland provinces like Sichuan and Henan to get the labour it needed. It went to find workers as there is shortage on the coast and is saving little in labour costs.

Ten years ago, it would be true that there were large differences between coastal and interior provinces but the Chinese government is determined to bring all areas of China to similar levels by 2020.

One good indications that labour supply is tight in China is that it has now become the largest buyer of industrial robots. If it had plenty of surplus labour then it would not have done that.