At the risk of being a party pooper, allow me to inject some common sense and a reality check into this superficial love-fest. I will phrase my questions to the Chinese members, but the mirror questions apply equally well to the Indian members.
- I see a lot of this fraternal feeling is based on a perceived mutual enmity of 'the white man', but what makes you think the Indian is any more trustworthy than the European? Surely it isn't based on some misplaced belief in Asian brotherhood -- not after what the Japanese, Chinese, Mongols, Cambodians, Indians, Arabs, etc. have all done to each other over the centuries.
- Whom exactly do you suppose the Indian military buildup is aimed at?
- There is almost no shared culture between China and India; they might as well be on separate continents.
- Anecdotal evidence about interaction with people from the other country is meaningless. Ordinary people are mostly decent, smart, hardworking, etc. from all countries. We are all human. It will have zero impact if there is a significant national security conflict between the nations.
- The only reason there hasn't been any significant clash of the two nations is purely an accident of history. The reason the Mongols spared India was because it was an insignificant backwater compared to the flourishing and rich Middle East.
- Geographically, there is absolutely nothing India can provide to China that it doesn't already get from Pakistan. In fact, considerably less, since alienating Pakistan will mean that China has to go the long way through the CARs to get to the Middle East. And neither Turkey nor Russia is going to let China get too comfortable in the CARs.
So, bottom line, China doesn't need India as an ally at all -- except to keep it from becoming a Western ally.
A very thought-provoking post!
From Chinese point of view, historical security threats have been from the north: Xiongnu in ancient times and Soviet in mordent time. Since 1800s, threats were from eastern seas, brought forth by Whites and the Japanese: Sino-Japanese wars, Opium wars, Korea war, and Sino-Soviet conflicts.
In a sharp contrast, from ancient time up to 1950s, there have been no major aggressions from the South in general and from Indian sub-continent in particular. There was a small conflict with one Indian tribe during Chinese Tang Dynasty, with victory went to Chinese-Nepal alliance.
From India side of history, China never invaded India before 1950s.
The above shows that
there is no historical animosity between the two countries.
Culturally, the biggest religion in China, Buddhism, was originated from Nepal/India, and propagated to China, although the reason behind the flow of the religion from India to China was that Buddhists were prosecuted by Hinduism, as Buddhism rejects caste theory. Nonetheless, Chinese have been influenced by Indian culture in that sense. However, the reverse flow of culture seems small and insignificant.
Thus, probably we should not say that the two countries completely “share” a culture, as Buddhism is rejected by the people of India in general, and cultural flow from China to India is negligible. Yet, Chinese culture is indeed influenced by Indian culture.
So, there is no historical reason, nor cultural reason, why China and India can’t get along.
Problems only arise during modern time since British colonists occupied India and brain-washed Indians with their philosophies.
Western norms and British mentality influence Indian modern politicians that, why a small British could beat a vast India, this is because British is better than us, so we must learn from them, from head to heel, everything. So the results are:
a)
Copy and paste British political system. Being fully brain-washed by British education, Indian forefathers forgot the fact that India and UK have completely different social soils for a social system to healthily grow, resulting in a most time rambunctious democracy.
b)
Inherit British privileges as a second-hand imperialism, completely forgetting that it is those privileges that brought pains to Indian people and Chinese people; and that it is those privileges that cause India want to be independent.
c)
Blindly believe that India’s copy of British democracy is superior than, thus should naturally beat and win over, an evil system such as communist Chinese system.
In summary,
rambunctious democracy, second-hand imperialism mentality and a blind believing of their superiority (jingoism) on the Indian side, non-yielding will and lack of study of democratic system on the Chinese side, plus some other minor factors, cause the most modern-time conflicts between India and China.
A typical example is the 1962 war, where Nehru showed in many times his hesitation to provoke China too much, but was proud of being a British colonist heir, and was pushed by Indian jingoistic parliament members in the name of democracy, for “forwarding policy”.
(funny how the only legitimate source is ToI)
