India's prospective PM has pro-China Inclinations

[Tshering22]

Seems to contradict this entirely..
Narendra Modi on China and Pakistan: Foreign Policy Stance or Electioneering Rhetoric?

See you are confusing cross-border terrorism with trading relations.

Chinese have a problem with us but it is not about Jihad. It is not ideological. It is a dispute that they are willing to play carrot and stick which we are equally involved in. That will remain in its place. Other than that, there is no threat that a Chinese feels from an Indian or otherwise. In fact, Chinese and Indians get along quite well if we keep this territorial thing out.

The reason why he is will be hard-hearted towards you people is because of the slew of terror attacks and attacks on Indian soldiers in Indian territory. That is unacceptable. While the current pathetic government sucks up to the jihadi votebank politics that further your agenda in our country, Modi is not tied with anything like that.

He knows that business and jobs will come only if there is safety and security for people. Which means that with him at the helm and his handpicked people in subsequent allocations will take a much harsher stance if something along the nature of Mumbai attacks, soldier beheadings and other such nonsensical acts are repeated. It may not translate into invasion of full scale but military confrontation on small scale and economic punitive actions won't be ruled out.

Think about it; he offered power exports to Pakistan despite your venom against him. So he's a man who means business. You do business with us, and both us Indians and you Pakistanis benefit. People come out of poverty and lead good lives.

Mess up with ideological jingoism and then don't expect a quivering p***y reaction like MMS'.

 

[SQ8]

See you are confusing cross-border terrorism with trading relations.

Chinese have a problem with us but it is not about Jihad. It is not ideological. It is a dispute that they are willing to play carrot and stick which we are equally involved in. That will remain in its place. Other than that, there is no threat that a Chinese feels from an Indian or otherwise. In fact, Chinese and Indians get along quite well if we keep this territorial thing out.

The reason why he is will be hard-hearted towards you people is because of the slew of terror attacks and attacks on Indian soldiers in Indian territory. That is unacceptable. While the current pathetic government sucks up to the jihadi votebank politics that further your agenda in our country, Modi is not tied with anything like that.

He knows that business and jobs will come only if there is safety and security for people. Which means that with him at the helm and his handpicked people in subsequent allocations will take a much harsher stance if something along the nature of Mumbai attacks, soldier beheadings and other such nonsensical acts are repeated. It may not translate into invasion of full scale but military confrontation on small scale and economic punitive actions won't be ruled out.

Think about it; he offered power exports to Pakistan despite your venom against him. So he's a man who means business. You do business with us, and both us Indians and you Pakistanis benefit. People come out of poverty and lead good lives.

Mess up with ideological jingoism and then don't expect a quivering p***y reaction like MMS'.

Most of your post is jingoistic nationalism and written with emotion which I disregarded in the first two lines. The remaining is all "praise Modi the lord almighty"..much like Imran Khan followers here.

I suggest to sit back and take an objective view before venting charged emotions. Pakistan's use of non state actors aside, the issue is Modi's duality on multiple subjects and his ever changing behroopia modes to appease his political alliances and audience.

 

[Vinod2070]

In fact Modi has not spoken about his foreign policy in any significant way during the campaign.

There is no question of his duplicity and he has been quite consistent in his focus on development.

People are imagining things based on articles written by some random people who are guessing what Modi will do, not based on his own policy prescriptions.

 

[Sourya Kharb]

According To Goldman Sachs: If Modi become PM of India Employment will increase 4 times than UPA Government
According to CEO of Citi Bank: If Modi become PM of India Rupee can come to 40 Rupee / USD in 2015
Check Out Kalpsar Project In Gujarat By Narendra Modi....
Please Visit and Checkout this link
slideshare. net /swamijyoti/kalpasar-presentation-final

 

[Sourya Kharb]

If Modi become PM of India....
India will get good relationship with China for sure.
I don't think that Modi will try to weak relationship between India and USA
Because he is just Development lover person..
Lets see what happen the election result will come on 16 May 2014

 

[tranquilium]

US should promote trade protectionalism and see how long both India and China with over 2.3 billions population survive without the benefit of US investment.

Erm, not sure about India, but US investment is a very very small part of foreign investment in China. Foreign investment is also a very small part of Chinese economy overall. Trade relation-wise, China is closest to the Asian countries, then Europe and finally USA.

 

[Jlaw]

The border dispute is the least issue between India and China. India will continue to milk the US's apprehension of China's rise and it can only do that if a certain amount of tension is maintained in the India-China relationship. Tension with China is also needed for India to make inroads in SE Asia, again, to feed off those countries disputes with China.

Trade with China will increase, but no Indian government -- least of all Modi -- will get too friendly with China.

I'm glad you are one of the few who understands geopolitics as most Chinese members here have sudden lapse of brain cramp when they see money and profits. China knows that the border issue is advantageous to them so there is no need for them to resolve it.

 

[sincity]

Erm, not sure about India, but US investment is a very very small part of foreign investment in China. Foreign investment is also a very small part of Chinese economy overall. Trade relation-wise, China is closest to the Asian countries, then Europe and finally USA.

China made over 50 billions dollars trade surplus with the US last yr. Do you believe China don't need US market to sustain China economy grow? What is the amount of bilateral trade to benefit China with over 50 billions dollar annually for the last 4 yrs? Only the US market allow China to make this kind of money. China want to antagonize the US but China don't want to lose US market by turning US into an enemy of China.

 

[tranquilium]

China made over 50 billions dollars trade surplus with the US last yr. Do you believe China don't need US market to sustain China economy grow? What is the amount of bilateral trade to benefit China with over 50 billions dollar annually for the last 4 yrs? Only the US market allow China to make this kind of money. China want to antagonize the US but China don't want to lose US market by turning US into an enemy of China.

US is indeed one of the largest market in the world and this is why the wall street disaster rippled out and has a global effect. However, your original post stated "how long both India and China with over 2.3 billions population survive without the benefit of US investment" and I answered exactly that. Though if US are to completely withdrawn from global economy today, then China would be very gladly lose the trade surplus, because such an act would essentially end US dollar's effect on world economy. I have always answered people who ask "what happens if US void all its bonds and what if US stop all trade", the answer is that if a few trillion dollars can get your biggest competitor to commit suicide, then it would be wonderful deal.

 

[sincity]

US is indeed one of the largest market in the world and this is why the wall street disaster rippled out and has a global effect. However, your original post stated "how long both India and China with over 2.3 billions population survive without the benefit of US investment" and I answered exactly that. Though if US are to completely withdrawn from global economy today, then China would be very gladly lose the trade surplus, because such an act would essentially end US dollar's effect on world economy. I have always answered people who ask "what happens if US void all its bonds and what if US stop all trade", the answer is that if a few trillion dollars can get your biggest competitor to commit suicide, then it would be wonderful deal.

Are you sure? Find me a country China can replace US for over 500 billions bilateral with China. Don't act all almighty since China is the nation most benefitial from the bilateral trade with the US.

 

[tranquilium]

Are you sure? Find me a country China can replace US for over 500 billions bilateral with China. Don't act all almighty since China is the nation most benefitial from the bilateral trade with the US.

Erm, I failed to see how bilateral trade is related to investment and how is this related to your statement of "how long both India and China with over 2.3 billions population survive without the benefit of US investment"?

 

[sincity]

Erm, I failed to see how bilateral trade is related to investment and how is this related to your statement of "how long both India and China with over 2.3 billions population survive without the benefit of US investment"?

US Investment is part of bilateral trade between other nation, trade protectionalism place the trade barrier against other nation and it's also covering of US investment on foreign firm.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Are you sure? Find me a country China can replace US for over 500 billions bilateral with China. Don't act all almighty since China is the nation most benefitial from the bilateral trade with the US.

I wonder why @Jlaw would thank this post? Are you pro-American?

Anyway, here is some data from an International source:

Financial Times - China unlocks the right kind of growth

China has never lacked for growth over the past decade but it has suffered from the wrong kind of growth, developing a dangerous reliance on investment.

Tucked into its latest economic data was evidence that the country has finally started to address this problem. Consumption clearly surpassed investment as China’s biggest growth engine, reinforcing a trend that emerged earlier this year – and something that has rarely happened over the past decade.

In the first three quarters, consumption accounted for 55 per cent of growth, while investment contributed 50.5 per cent. With external demand weak, net exports actually subtracted 5.5 per cent, according to data from the national statistics bureau.

Consumption accounts for around 55% of Chinese growth, domestic Investment counts for around 50% of Chinese growth. (Foreign investment is negligible, less than 1% of overall Chinese investment).

Net exports actually subtracted 5% from China's growth.

We are not as dependent on America as a lot of Americans like to think, in terms of trade only about 16% of our exports go to America.

 

[Tshering22]

Most of your post is jingoistic nationalism and written with emotion which I disregarded in the first two lines. The remaining is all "praise Modi the lord almighty"..much like Imran Khan followers here.

I suggest to sit back and take an objective view before venting charged emotions. Pakistan's use of non state actors aside, the issue is Modi's duality on multiple subjects and his ever changing behroopia modes to appease his political alliances and audience.

Then you haven't read the first two lines clearly which highlights the nature of relationship we have with China (as is the topic of the thread).

Unlike the Nehru Dynasty, he is not an appointed puppet monarch family. Naturally in a democracy, he alone cannot issue orders and the parliament has to be convinced. That is there even for you. But considering the actions your country has done in the last decade, even good attempts like Nawaz's initiative to have friendly ties have fallen away from limelight.

As for politics, till we are a democracy, there will be certain compulsions we will have to face. That applies for most countries around.

I don't know what emotional jingoism you find in me citing a harsher response to terror attacks.

 

[tranquilium]

US Investment is part of bilateral trade between other nation, trade protectionalism place the trade barrier against other nation and it's also covering of US investment on foreign firm.

@Chinese-Dragon has already explained it pretty well in his post. I will supplement his point with a bit data. The following link is a detailed break down of US-China trade by category of goods: (you can play around with it to see different partners and the trade volume, it is a very useful site)
Trade Map - Trade statistics for international business development
Total Chinese export to US in 2013 is 369,111,212 USD, total Chinese export to the world is 2,210,522,658 USD. Basically, US' import from China accounts for 16.698% of the total Chinese export.
In comparison, Chinese import from US in 2013 is 153,606,906 USD. Total US export to the world is 1,949,934,687 USD. So China also accounts for 7.878% of US export, but wait, since the theoretical trade barrier is erected on US side and it is supposedly able to complete cut off US-China trade, then even though China's 16.698% will be affected, the entirety of US' import/export would be affect because a barrier of such magnitude will most certainly affect US trade with other country as well.

I am getting off topic. The bilateral trade discussion is nice, but it is not related to the original point. The original point is regarding to US investment. The Chinese economy's dependence on US investment is quite small, largely because US isn't a major investor in China to begin with..