are you agreeing with me, i said they nod on No and shake on yes
India’s Snub to China on OBOR: Unwise to Ignore Economic Interests
- Thread starter tw00tw00
- Start date
are you agreeing with me, i said they nod on No and shake on yes
Srinivas
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2009
- Messages
- 12,455
- Reaction score
- -26
- Country
- Location
I do not understand which goods the Chinese are going to export through cpec to what country?
For Europe they have another route , for USA they have Pacific Ocean.
Only Africa and Middle East are left, but Middle East is in turmoil and is not a huge consumer market. Africa is the only reason I guess and at a time when china is transforming itself from fossil fuel to electric vehicles , calling cpec as energy corridor also seems not apt.
For Europe they have another route , for USA they have Pacific Ocean.
Only Africa and Middle East are left, but Middle East is in turmoil and is not a huge consumer market. Africa is the only reason I guess and at a time when china is transforming itself from fossil fuel to electric vehicles , calling cpec as energy corridor also seems not apt.
Great Sachin
BANNED
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,931
- Reaction score
- -14
- Country
- Location
It is like ..I allow you to make a road right through my house...thinking every time you pass..you will give me a lollipop
Kiss_of_the_Dragon
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2011
- Messages
- 10,253
- Reaction score
- 11
- Country
- Location
What ever commodities we export to Central Asia, we can export its to Africa and Middle east using CPEC and we can import other thing that China need such mineral, Oil, gas using the same corridor. Chinese north west will be a new manufacturing region of China and eastern part of China will concentrate on service such banking, insurance, IT. If China wants to enrich our western region, we need to have a good trade road to deliver and receive the commodities. I'm eager to see the CPEC complete, Pakistan and China then will start to enjoy the fruit of their hard labors.
ohmrlobalobayeh
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2012
- Messages
- 3,388
- Reaction score
- -23
- Country
- Location
Im amused by the all that shouting, yelling, incessant interjections and even cursing- is this how Indian news interviews/discussions between participants and hosts themselves- are conducted on TV?
Jlaw
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2013
- Messages
- 9,693
- Reaction score
- -22
- Country
- Location
Was he khalim?
Thorough Pro
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2008
- Messages
- 13,232
- Reaction score
- -21
- Country
- Location
Indians are dumb and have the history to prove that they always go against the current, always miss the bus and always cry like a bitch.
Jlaw
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2013
- Messages
- 9,693
- Reaction score
- -22
- Country
- Location
India made the right choice in this case.
Why do you China need to force another country to join? India said no so just move on instead of forcing them to join.and your gov making a fool out of yourself```anway join in or not we will keep dumping cheap stuffs in India
Too many interruption.. No idea what they saying
Last edited:
Sloth 22
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2016
- Messages
- 619
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
India did not see any benefits , so it did not join.
China does not see it as a big loss, or even a loss and is trying to get things done.
Then what is the problem ?
And why are people from 3rd country crying here? Yes we will rather miss a bus to development, where we need to sell off our nation and take loans at huge interest rates with zero transparency.
China does not see it as a big loss, or even a loss and is trying to get things done.
Then what is the problem ?
And why are people from 3rd country crying here? Yes we will rather miss a bus to development, where we need to sell off our nation and take loans at huge interest rates with zero transparency.
http://indianexpress.com/article/op...est-failure-of-indian-foreign-policy-4657738/
OBOR is the grandest failure of Indian foreign policy
India’s objection to CPEC is extremely valid, but the moot point remains that we were not able to carry any of the big powers on the vital question of Westphalian sovereignty.
As the Narendra Modi government completes three years of its tryst with electoral destiny on May 16, it could not have wished for a more portentous international conference in far, but yet nearby, Beijing.
The One Belt One Road conference convened by the People’s Republic of China over the weekend to unveil and showcase the most ambitious connectivity project of modern times represents the grandest failure of Indian foreign policy and it’s quarantine into splendid isolation. However, first a word about the project.
Chinese president Xi Jinping, in 2013, unveiled a novel economic structure that would connect China’s Silk Road Mercantile Belt project in Central Asia with its Maritime Silk Road, through linked bodies of water from the South China Sea to the Indian Ocean. In principle, these trade stratagems centre on increasing China’s connection with countries along the ancient Silk Road in Eurasia, while creating a new Silk Road across Asia to South Asia and Africa.
One part of the project is focused on the creation of road connections between China and Eurasia, involving infrastructure projects such as highways and rail links. The other part of the project concerns maritime routes that will connect China with South East Asia, South Asia and ports up and down the east coast of Africa.
The measure of this concept, if it ever reaches fruition, is both the project’s greatest hawking point and conceivable trial. The trade links once established will cover 65 per cent of the world’s population, one-third of global GDP and a quarter of all goods and services in the international economy.
Such a focus of goods and services will upturn how conventional products, such as energy, are traded. Observers draw parallels with the Marshall Plan that reinvented Europe post the Second World War. With enormous sums of money, ranging from $ 800 billion to $1 trillion to be invested over the next five years, there is a lot of cash to spread around, even in China’s extended neighbourhood.
In comparison, the investment into the Pakistani component of this initiative, the Chinese Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), anywhere between $46-62 billion, is a mere pittance.
The summit in Beijing over the weekend was attended by 29 heads of states and governments which included Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, Sri Lankan PM Ranil Wickermasinghe, delegations from all other South Asian countries barring Bhutan, as well as leaders and officials from the big boys on the global stage, namely Russia, US, Japan, UK, Germany and France.
That is where India’s lack of nimbleness became counterproductive. While our objection to the CPEC is extremely valid — that it passes through territory acceded to India by the erstwhile Maharaja of Jammu Kashmir, Hari Singh, on October 26,1947 and whatever is in the possession of Pakistan is illegally occupied — the moot point remains that we were not able to carry any of the big powers, including the US, and especially our neighbors along on the vital question of Westphalian sovereignty.
By boycotting the summit rather than showing up and making our voice heard loud and clear in the comity of nations, India has in fact sent out a message that it will make proforma noise on this issue but actually acquiesce to the fait accompli.
What this lack of dexterity does is allow the Chinese embrace of Pakistan to get even tighter. A front page exclusive in Pakistan’s ‘Dawn’ newspaper for the first time revealed to Pakistanis themselves the extent of Chinese colonisation this project would entail. But given the desperate, if not perilous, situation that Pakistan finds itself in, it would be surprising if there is any substantive protest by any section of the population.
A strategic relationship transformed into an economic vested interest means that India cannot bank upon Chinese neutrality in case of a possible conflict with Pakistan – which India may blunder into as the BJP-led government works overtime to use the Kashmir flashpoint to drive home the otherness of the citizens to the rest of India.
A two-front situation may become an unfortunate imperative that India may just have to deal with, given the fact China is revising its position on accepted principles with regard to the territorial dispute with India, in the protracted but ongoing Special Representative process.
With Gwadar becoming operational, China would be able to surmount its Malacca Dilemma — that is pump and transport it’s energy and mineral resources directly to Kashgar as they exit the Straits of Hormuz — thereby circumventing the Malacca chokepoint.
The fact remains that India would have to deal with Pakistani and Chinese navies jointly patrolling the Arabian Sea off India’s western seaboard and directly threatening India’s energy and resource supply lines. The story does not end there. With Hambantota also being developed as a Chinese resourced port in Sri Lanka, the Gwadar-Hamabantota axis may end up emerging as an access denial area in India’s home waters.
Then there is the eastern headache, which is the growing Chinese proximity to Nepal and Bangladesh, as well as the deep economic linkages with Myanmar. While Sheikh Hasina’s government is very friendly towards India, that may not be the permanent state of play. There is a perception in the Bangladesh polity, especially the principal opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), that India has put all its eggs into one basket.
Given the strained relations with Nepal post the economic blockade of 2015, Kathmandu’s propensity to explore other options especially energises the torturous land route with China.
While all this infrastructure development has been in the works for a while, where the Modi government has tripped badly is in its inability to tread the fine balance between the big powers. Though it’s perceived cosiness towards the US has not borne any tangible fruit in the past three years, what it has achieved is to drive both Russia and China into a state of ambivalence and antagonism, respectively. There is no better evidence of this than the recent Russian-Pakistani defense exercises, a first in 70 years.
It is therefore in India’s larger national interest to not allow the China-Pakistan embrace to turn into its greatest strategic nightmare. India must finesse it’s relationship with China, for there are other implications, namely in Afghanistan.
This is only one of the great blunders over the past three years. The others will follow in the days to come.
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/editorial/off-the-road/article18459388.ece
Off the road: India cannot sit out B&RI
Three years after the plan for the Belt and Road Initiative (B&RI, formerly called the Silk Road Economic Belt or One Belt One Road) was announced, China has concluded the first Belt and Road Forum. While 130 countries participated, of which at least 68 are now part of the $900-billion infrastructure corridor project, India boycotted the event, making its concerns public hours before the forum commenced in Beijing. India's reservations, according to the carefully worded statement issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, are threefold. One, the B&RI’s flagship project is the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, which includes projects in the Gilgit-Baltistan region, ignoring India’s “sovereignty and territorial integrity”. Two, the B&RI infrastructure project structure smacks of Chinese neo-colonialism, and could cause an “unsustainable debt burden for communities” with an adverse impact on the environment in the partner countries. And three, there is a lack of transparency in China’s agenda, indicating that New Delhi believes the B&RI is not just an economic project but one that China is promoting for political control. These concerns are no doubt valid, and the refusal to join the B&RI till China addresses the objection over Gilgit-Baltistan is understandable. The decision to not attend even as an observer, however, effectively closes the door for diplomacy. It stands in contrast to countries such as the U.S. and Japan, which are not a part of the B&RI but sent official delegations.
Each of India’s neighbours, with the exception of Bhutan, has signed up for the B&RI, expecting to see billions of dollars in loans for projects including roads, rail, gas pipelines, oil pipelines, electricity and telecommunications connectivity. India’s anxiety about the possible debt trap may be well-founded, but it ignores the benefits these countries believe will accrue from the project. Simply put, India cannot appear to be more worried about these countries than their own governments are, or to determine their stance. As a friend and neighbour, India can at best alert them to the perils of the B&RI, and offer assistance should they choose another path. India may also face some difficult choices in the road ahead, because as a co-founder of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and as a member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (from June 2017) it will be asked to support many of the projects under the B&RI. At such a point, especially given the endorsement from the UN Secretary General, who said the B&RI is rooted in a shared vision for global development, India should not simply sit out the project. It must actively engage with China to have its particular grievances addressed, articulate its concerns to other partner countries in a more productive manner, and take a position as an Asian leader, not an outlier in the quest for more connectivity.
OBOR is the grandest failure of Indian foreign policy
India’s objection to CPEC is extremely valid, but the moot point remains that we were not able to carry any of the big powers on the vital question of Westphalian sovereignty.
As the Narendra Modi government completes three years of its tryst with electoral destiny on May 16, it could not have wished for a more portentous international conference in far, but yet nearby, Beijing.
The One Belt One Road conference convened by the People’s Republic of China over the weekend to unveil and showcase the most ambitious connectivity project of modern times represents the grandest failure of Indian foreign policy and it’s quarantine into splendid isolation. However, first a word about the project.
Chinese president Xi Jinping, in 2013, unveiled a novel economic structure that would connect China’s Silk Road Mercantile Belt project in Central Asia with its Maritime Silk Road, through linked bodies of water from the South China Sea to the Indian Ocean. In principle, these trade stratagems centre on increasing China’s connection with countries along the ancient Silk Road in Eurasia, while creating a new Silk Road across Asia to South Asia and Africa.
One part of the project is focused on the creation of road connections between China and Eurasia, involving infrastructure projects such as highways and rail links. The other part of the project concerns maritime routes that will connect China with South East Asia, South Asia and ports up and down the east coast of Africa.
The measure of this concept, if it ever reaches fruition, is both the project’s greatest hawking point and conceivable trial. The trade links once established will cover 65 per cent of the world’s population, one-third of global GDP and a quarter of all goods and services in the international economy.
Such a focus of goods and services will upturn how conventional products, such as energy, are traded. Observers draw parallels with the Marshall Plan that reinvented Europe post the Second World War. With enormous sums of money, ranging from $ 800 billion to $1 trillion to be invested over the next five years, there is a lot of cash to spread around, even in China’s extended neighbourhood.
In comparison, the investment into the Pakistani component of this initiative, the Chinese Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), anywhere between $46-62 billion, is a mere pittance.
The summit in Beijing over the weekend was attended by 29 heads of states and governments which included Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, Sri Lankan PM Ranil Wickermasinghe, delegations from all other South Asian countries barring Bhutan, as well as leaders and officials from the big boys on the global stage, namely Russia, US, Japan, UK, Germany and France.
That is where India’s lack of nimbleness became counterproductive. While our objection to the CPEC is extremely valid — that it passes through territory acceded to India by the erstwhile Maharaja of Jammu Kashmir, Hari Singh, on October 26,1947 and whatever is in the possession of Pakistan is illegally occupied — the moot point remains that we were not able to carry any of the big powers, including the US, and especially our neighbors along on the vital question of Westphalian sovereignty.
By boycotting the summit rather than showing up and making our voice heard loud and clear in the comity of nations, India has in fact sent out a message that it will make proforma noise on this issue but actually acquiesce to the fait accompli.
What this lack of dexterity does is allow the Chinese embrace of Pakistan to get even tighter. A front page exclusive in Pakistan’s ‘Dawn’ newspaper for the first time revealed to Pakistanis themselves the extent of Chinese colonisation this project would entail. But given the desperate, if not perilous, situation that Pakistan finds itself in, it would be surprising if there is any substantive protest by any section of the population.
A strategic relationship transformed into an economic vested interest means that India cannot bank upon Chinese neutrality in case of a possible conflict with Pakistan – which India may blunder into as the BJP-led government works overtime to use the Kashmir flashpoint to drive home the otherness of the citizens to the rest of India.
A two-front situation may become an unfortunate imperative that India may just have to deal with, given the fact China is revising its position on accepted principles with regard to the territorial dispute with India, in the protracted but ongoing Special Representative process.
With Gwadar becoming operational, China would be able to surmount its Malacca Dilemma — that is pump and transport it’s energy and mineral resources directly to Kashgar as they exit the Straits of Hormuz — thereby circumventing the Malacca chokepoint.
The fact remains that India would have to deal with Pakistani and Chinese navies jointly patrolling the Arabian Sea off India’s western seaboard and directly threatening India’s energy and resource supply lines. The story does not end there. With Hambantota also being developed as a Chinese resourced port in Sri Lanka, the Gwadar-Hamabantota axis may end up emerging as an access denial area in India’s home waters.
Then there is the eastern headache, which is the growing Chinese proximity to Nepal and Bangladesh, as well as the deep economic linkages with Myanmar. While Sheikh Hasina’s government is very friendly towards India, that may not be the permanent state of play. There is a perception in the Bangladesh polity, especially the principal opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), that India has put all its eggs into one basket.
Given the strained relations with Nepal post the economic blockade of 2015, Kathmandu’s propensity to explore other options especially energises the torturous land route with China.
While all this infrastructure development has been in the works for a while, where the Modi government has tripped badly is in its inability to tread the fine balance between the big powers. Though it’s perceived cosiness towards the US has not borne any tangible fruit in the past three years, what it has achieved is to drive both Russia and China into a state of ambivalence and antagonism, respectively. There is no better evidence of this than the recent Russian-Pakistani defense exercises, a first in 70 years.
It is therefore in India’s larger national interest to not allow the China-Pakistan embrace to turn into its greatest strategic nightmare. India must finesse it’s relationship with China, for there are other implications, namely in Afghanistan.
This is only one of the great blunders over the past three years. The others will follow in the days to come.
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/editorial/off-the-road/article18459388.ece
Off the road: India cannot sit out B&RI
Three years after the plan for the Belt and Road Initiative (B&RI, formerly called the Silk Road Economic Belt or One Belt One Road) was announced, China has concluded the first Belt and Road Forum. While 130 countries participated, of which at least 68 are now part of the $900-billion infrastructure corridor project, India boycotted the event, making its concerns public hours before the forum commenced in Beijing. India's reservations, according to the carefully worded statement issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, are threefold. One, the B&RI’s flagship project is the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, which includes projects in the Gilgit-Baltistan region, ignoring India’s “sovereignty and territorial integrity”. Two, the B&RI infrastructure project structure smacks of Chinese neo-colonialism, and could cause an “unsustainable debt burden for communities” with an adverse impact on the environment in the partner countries. And three, there is a lack of transparency in China’s agenda, indicating that New Delhi believes the B&RI is not just an economic project but one that China is promoting for political control. These concerns are no doubt valid, and the refusal to join the B&RI till China addresses the objection over Gilgit-Baltistan is understandable. The decision to not attend even as an observer, however, effectively closes the door for diplomacy. It stands in contrast to countries such as the U.S. and Japan, which are not a part of the B&RI but sent official delegations.
Each of India’s neighbours, with the exception of Bhutan, has signed up for the B&RI, expecting to see billions of dollars in loans for projects including roads, rail, gas pipelines, oil pipelines, electricity and telecommunications connectivity. India’s anxiety about the possible debt trap may be well-founded, but it ignores the benefits these countries believe will accrue from the project. Simply put, India cannot appear to be more worried about these countries than their own governments are, or to determine their stance. As a friend and neighbour, India can at best alert them to the perils of the B&RI, and offer assistance should they choose another path. India may also face some difficult choices in the road ahead, because as a co-founder of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and as a member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (from June 2017) it will be asked to support many of the projects under the B&RI. At such a point, especially given the endorsement from the UN Secretary General, who said the B&RI is rooted in a shared vision for global development, India should not simply sit out the project. It must actively engage with China to have its particular grievances addressed, articulate its concerns to other partner countries in a more productive manner, and take a position as an Asian leader, not an outlier in the quest for more connectivity.
Kabira
BANNED
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,383
- Reaction score
- -20
- Country
- Location
Just look at CPEC agricultural plan, it's a game changer for Pakistan. Modi have obviously failed in India and now rely on hate politics then actual development. The development in Gujarat was not this dalit genius idea, gujjus are centuries old baniyas. Even in Karachi these gujjus baniyas are rich and entrepreneur. He though he can replicate same model in cow belt and failed miserably.
grey boy 2
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2009
- Messages
- 6,484
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
FAKE NEWS, i stopped reading right after i read the word "ISOLATION", cos according to our dear Indian friends here, that word "ISOLATION" supposed to be monopoly tailor made for "Pakistan and China" NO?
The One Belt One Road conference convened by the People’s Republic of China over the weekend to unveil and showcase the most ambitious connectivity project of modern times represents the grandest failure of Indian foreign policy and it’s quarantine into splendid isolation.
The One Belt One Road conference convened by the People’s Republic of China over the weekend to unveil and showcase the most ambitious connectivity project of modern times represents the grandest failure of Indian foreign policy and it’s quarantine into splendid isolation.
Rajaraja Chola
BANNED
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2010
- Messages
- 9,051
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
So? Thanks for the article. But even Indian public is not interested in it. There are lots of infrastructure projects Chinese can invest in India outside the OBOR at India's terms and conditions....
Similar threads
- Article
