Li Keqiang hails Pakistan as China's 'iron brother'

[Mech]

Yes they are warm people, indeed. However, you really do need to understand that they feel extremely close to people of Pakistan than any other nation. You can ask any of your Turkish friends about it. It's impossible for me to put those feelings into words.

I guess everyone despite their knowledge would like to think they are somehow treated "better".

 

[qinglong-china]

I didn't think there was anything wrong with the editorial -- What I am trying to do here is to get Pakistanis to engage critically, I am not suggesting that China is not a friend an ally, instead I am hoping Pakistanis will ask themselves what kind of friend and ally is Pakistan - the hope is that such questioning will give rise to an awareness that "feel good" must be matched by DOING good, otherwise feel good does not last -- so the problem to become aware of is HOW and Why Pakistan should take advantage of this opportunity to create Broad and Deep, mutually profitable relationship wit China that can outlast our lives and benefit both peoples beyond our lives -- understand?

I understand what you said. but I ,,,,,,,,,
Two completely different meaning. After reading english version, I feel that the daily special sully the China-Pakistan friendship. So I am very angry. After reading chinese version, I feel that the daily special calls on more chinese for greater investment in Pakistan to cherish the China-Pakistan friendship.

batie(巴&#38081 is translated into 'iron brother', I think it is not very inaccurate.
tie(&#38081 is not meaning of "iron", tie(&#38081 in chinese is faithful, firm, never betray, nothing to do with iron.

 

[Hyperion]

I have felt the difference, that's why I say so. Up to you to believe it or not.

I guess everyone despite their knowledge would like to think they are somehow treated "better".

 

[muse]

Two completely different meaning. After reading english version, I feel that the daily special sully the China-Pakistan friendship. So I am very angry. After reading chinese version, I feel that the daily special calls on more chinese for greater investment in Pakistan to cherish the China-Pakistan friendship.

Perhapos two different audiences?

 

[Mech]

I have felt the difference, that's why I say so. Up to you to believe it or not.

I don't really know how to what to tell you. I had an opportunity to attend a conference hosted by Izmir university, I was told how much Turks admired Indians and Bollywood. Also had the displeasure of enduring a 15 minute description of Aamir khan.

If i make similar broad generalizations like you did about turkey based on my experience, i would go ahead and say Indians are treated better than everyone else in Turkey. That wouldn't make it any more credible, but there you go.

I usually make it a point to steer clear of anecdotal evidence.

 

[Hyperion]

Comparing a weekend conference and someone living for 18+ years in Turkey?

I don't really know how to what to tell you. I had an opportunity to attend a conference hosted by Izmir university, I was told how much Turks admired Indians and Bollywood. Also had the displeasure of enduring a 15 minute description of Aamir khan.

If i make similar broad generalizations like you did about turkey based on my experience, i would go ahead and say Indians are treated better than everyone else in Turkey. That wouldn't make it any more credible, but there you go.

I usually make it a point to steer clear of anecdotal evidence.

 

[Mech]

Comparing a weekend conference and someone living for 18+ years in Turkey?

Well, I didn't start it. Anyhow, I'm really not interested in going further along this particular topic. The point i was really trying to emphasize is that you can tell me a lifetime of anecdotes and it still wouldn't make your assertion any more credible.
#QuantifiableData

 

[Hyperion]

Quantify this:

1. How much does your wife love you.
2. How much do your offsprings love you.

I'll answer something on a similar scale.

Yeah, no point in it. We can't change who we are.

Well, I didn't start it. Anyhow, I'm really not interested in going further along this particular topic. The point i was really trying to emphasize is that you can tell me a lifetime of anecdotes and it still wouldn't make your assertion any more credible.
#QuantifiableData

 

[curioususer]

...They said "to invade Pakistan would be the same as invading China". True Brothers...

When did China say this?

 

[JSCh]

OK, I think the editorial is very matter of fact and is aimed primarily at the India -- it makes clear that China has a "broad" relationship with India and "deep" one with Pakistan, I read that to mean that India is the pivotal relationship, that is why it is broad based, whereas the relationship with Pakistan does not have the same scope and that it builds on what already exists - Interesting also was the assurance offered to the Indian that China will not use Pakistan against India and the China seeks to maintain a balance between the two neighbors at least in the managing of their conflicts. The General understanding offered was therefore interesting to me and I hope instructive to Pakistanis. The Chinese do not want the Pakistanis doing a NK on them.

I also found the prescription offered to Pakistan interesting - national peace and development of the economy -- however, I was interested to note the absence of any detail or road map - I may be wrong about this but it seemed t me this was more in the category of wish list.

The importance of Pakistan to the Chinese, as IS put it in his article was that of a bridge, and the editorial makes the same case, as a vehicle for the projection fo Chinese soft power to influence others (Afghanistan? Iran and the Wahabi tyrannies? US?) - And this to me, explains the perceived need to invest more in South Asia.

"The relationship between India and China has grown broader while the Sino-Pakistan relations have gained depth."

"broader"(NOT broad) means it cover more area than the relationship used to. "deeper" mean more in depth like in more concrete. Deep do not preclude broad.

China do not want to be too involved(read taking side) in Pakistan-India conflict because China see that as not conducive to long term security in south asia. We lived in a world where sovereignty is well respected. A long term solution would only be possible if both sides agree to it.

The "national peace and development of the economy" is from China own experience the most important factor in nation building. Chinese generally feel that the main problem in Pakistan is security/stability/national unity. Chinese would not offer road map because it is against Chinese sentimentality to preach without action(would Pakistan find it offensive for China to comment on Pakistan internal affair?) and China would never interfere in the internal affair of Pakistan.

China would very much like to help make Pakistan into a stable and prosperous country. This would help put China-Pakistan relationship as an example for other countries that want to make friend with China, hence soft power. China can contribute in the prosperous part, for the stable part China can help Pakistan to be sufficiently capable of defending herself against external threat, but it is impossible for China to help in a comprehensive and effective way in countering internal threat.

I would try make my read of the Global times editorial.

The article try to dispels some of the concerns that Indian routinely aim at China like balance Pakistan against India and transfer of nuclear weapon technology. It is trying to convince Indian to accept the special relationship that exist between China and Pakistan by reassuring Indian that the relationship is not aim at balancing India and that it is in long term beneficiary to all parties(this should also reassure Pakistan to infer that China would not build China India relationship at the expense of Pakistan)

It then spell out the benefits of developing China Pakistan/South Asian relationship, that China has not done enough in the past and should take a strategic long term view to remedy the shortcoming.

 

[Developereo]

I heard somewhere that "A friend in need is a friend in deed"

But looks like that doesn't apply to China Pakistan friendship. Weird thing this Iron friendship is

You can't expect a friend to invest in bad business deals.

As the Forbes article mentions -- contrary to this false Express Tribune propaganda -- Chinese companies were in the midst of a heavy investment boom in the 2000s but most of them pulled out because of the worsening security situation.

As I wrote, if you can't provide security for your investors, they will leave and the only money you will see will be gamblers and those with ulterior motives.

 

[Developereo]

China has a "broad" relationship with India and "deep" one with Pakistan,

I read that as an acknowledgement that, as another rising player on the global field, India will be a frequent member in international fora where China will act. This is simply an acknowledgement of reality and is not a value judgement by the Chinese. You can't expect them to drag Pakistan into international organizations where it doesn't belong. It is up to Pakistan to raise its international profile and, when it does so, Chinese interaction with Pakistan will also broaden across the spectrum.

Interesting also was the assurance offered to the Indian that China will not use Pakistan against India

Funny. I read that as a sharp rebuke to India that the China-Pakistan relationship is none of its business.

I also found the prescription offered to Pakistan interesting - national peace and development of the economy

It was a generic boilerplate statement as would be expected in a short communique. The list of priorities for Pakistan is well known; it is the Pakistani authorities who fail to acknowledge it. no matter now many times and who else keeps reminding them.

The importance of Pakistan to the Chinese, as IS put it in his article was that of a bridge, and the editorial makes the same case, as a vehicle for the projection fo Chinese soft power to influence others (Afghanistan? Iran and the Wahabi tyrannies? US?) - And this to me, explains the perceived need to invest more in South Asia.

Any successful relationship is based on mutual win-win. Chinese leadership is acting in favor of Chinese national interests, not to run an international charity. That much is understood by all.

What seems to elude some people is that Chinese expansion into the region suits Pakistani interests as well, because it provides a counterweight to US and Indian influence. Furthermore, there is nothing stopping Pakistan from pursing its own national interests within China.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

I think more young people between China and Pakistan need more communication, because English and Chinese are different.
Many threads from PDF translated into Chinese widely spread across parts of the chinese web. such as J10, JF-17, J-20, J-21. Chinese netizens spoke highly of Pakistan. but their words were not translated into English.
My English is not good, Please forgive me.

Why not talk to the moderators about this, im sure they can work something out.

@WebMaster
@Oscar
@nuclearpak

So according to you, anyone (Indian or Pakistani) who talks sense, the truth about ground realities, and incontrovertible facts, is being negative about Pakistan???

Get out of your denial mode and have the courage to face reality. That's the only way you can take corrective action to turn things around for the better.

Would u like to define what u call ground realities,incontrovertible facts in yr country?


BTW what about Jaswant Singh, LK Advani, Miss Roy n Sharmila Ghosh??

 

[MST]

You can't expect a friend to invest in bad business deals.

As the Forbes article mentions -- contrary to this false Express Tribune propaganda -- Chinese companies were in the midst of a heavy investment boom in the 2000s but most of them pulled out because of the worsening security situation.

As I wrote, if you can't provide security for your investors, they will leave and the only money you will see will be gamblers and those with ulterior motives.

Sir then how is this relationship any different from any other business dealing. I mean if this is the case then whats so special about it. Look at Russia e.g. They were ready to go to a Nuclear war with US for India (when the 7th fleet arrived in BOB in 71). Can you give an example where China has done something similar for Pakistan.

 

[Menace2Society]

Sir then how is this relationship any different from any other business dealing. I mean if this is the case then whats so special about it. Look at Russia e.g. They were ready to go to a Nuclear war with US for India (when the 7th fleet arrived in BOB in 71). Can you give an example where China has done something similar for Pakistan.

Access to 250 JF-17 jets stationed in China, along with logistical and political support in case Pakistan go to war with India, regardless of context. And that is just documented, we do not know what else is agreed in the background. India are encircled.