The Great Game Changer: Belt and Road Intiative (BRI; OBOR)

[cirr]

Yet the thick skinned have the audacity to close Confucius Institute。

These slimy people are base and have no sense of shame。

 

[TaiShang]

Yet the thick skinned have the audacity to close Confucius Institute。

These slimy people are base and have no sense of shame。

This is despite the fact that Confucius Institutes never do spying.

US NGOs, on the other hand, are literally fifth-column terrorist organizations.

 

[TaiShang]

Russia, China to hold WWII-themed film festival

A festival of World War II-era Soviet movies will be shown in China for the first time ever, Russia's state movie fund Gosfilmofond said Monday.

The "Eternal Flame" retrospection will be held from Aug. 26 to Sept. 12 in Beijing and the eastern Chinese city of Suzhou, Gosfilmofond said in a statement.

The festival is devoted to the 70th anniversary of Soviet and Chinese joint victory in WWII over German and Japanese aggressors, the statement said.

In total, seven movies will be shown. None of them has been shown in China before.

Russia, China to hold WWII-themed film festival - People's Daily Online

 

[opruh]

There should be a documentary on how Japan was bombed back to stone age.

 

[TaiShang]

US backs China & Russia, blow to Indian UNSC dream

Aug 11, 2015, TOI

NEW DELHI: India's official dream of getting a permanent seat in the UN Security Council was dealt a decisive blow with the US teaming up with China and Russia to oppose negotiations for changes in the body.

After a long and laborious process of discussions, countries have finally come out with a framework text which could be the basis of negotiations to reform the Security Council — not only to admit more countries as permanent members, but also to make its working more transparent. The text was the result of inter-governmental negotiations (IGN) and was introduced in the UN General Assembly by its president Sam Kutesa on August 1.

The text, which may continue to be debated, however, has a short effective life after three biggies —US, China and Russia — came out against it, making any negotiations little more than an academic exercise.

The US stand was a blow largely because its has been what New Delhi believed the most recent and important voice supporting India's permanent UNSC membership. In a letter, the US said, "The IGN is the most appropriate forum for these discussions. It is critical that any reform proposal enjoy broad consensus among member states." Sources said it's just diplomatese for pushing the can down the road.

Indian officials say the IGN was really not going anywhere, but it has become the flavour of the season with all the nay-sayers like US, Russia and China. Washington is willing to consider specific countries for entry into the UNSC but only after they have proved their credentials in their "ability and willingness to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security and to other purposes of the United Nations". But it will not agree to "any alteration or expansion of the veto".

While India will not stake its partnership with the US on its non-support, it does make things awkward. PM Narendra Modi has recently written a long letter to all 193-member countries of the UN pushing India's case in the UNSC. Indian diplomats believe text-based negotiations are its best chance to get into the UNSC.

Russia, India's oldest supporter for the UNSC seat, also supported the inter-governmental negotiations, rejecting the text-based one. "The intergovernmental negotiations on the UN Security Council reform should proceed in a calm, transparent and inclusive atmosphere free from artificial deadlines. If a consensus on this issue is not possible to achieve, then in any case it will be politically necessary to secure the support by the overwhelming majority of the member-states — a substantially greater number than the legally required two thirds of votes at the General Assembly," it said. That, say diplomats, will be almost impossible to achieve.

China has remained a steadfast opponent to the process of UNSC reform, and has been the unofficial sponsor of the 13-nation group UfC. So China's opposition to the negotiations is not a surprise. Beijing has used its considerable clout in Africa, Asia and Latin America to build opinion against the text process.

In its response, Beijing said it would refuse to "populate" the document. Outlining its position, China said, "Member-states are still seriously divided on the Security Council reform. No general agreement has been reached on any solution so far. Member-states still need to engage in patient consultations to find a solution that accommodates each other's interests and concerns. Any solution or reform model should enjoy general agreement among member-states.

The five clusters of key issues concerning Security Council reform are interrelated, and should not be addressed in isolation of each other. It is imperative to stick to the approach of a package solution." Indicating that it might be difficult to ever get China's support, it put out what appears to be an impossible position — "No solution on which member-states are seriously divided or approach that may cause division among member-states will have China's support."

 

[baajey]

HMMM AWKWARD SITUATION.
BTW, CAN INDIA LEAVE THE UN ?? after a dramatic Bhutto-ish dialogue baazi, of course.

 

[badguy2000]

1.USA doesn't allow CHina to have more votes of IMF and World bank, China just set up AIIB and Silk Road FUND to marginalize WB and IMF.
And now, WB/IMF are more eager to give CHinese more Vetos than China itself ,Otherwise, bouth would be replaced by AIIB/Silk Road FUnd sooner or later and got diabled like "the league of Nation".

2.if India were able to set up a Parallel or alternative of UN ,just as CHina does with WB/IMF, India would be offered a Veto of UN .

Thus, India had better spend its energy and money on developing its economy, instead of wasting money/time appealing Veto of UN now before its might deseves a veto.

 

[Economic superpower]

LOL just like what everyone said will happen.

None of the UNSC members will ever give anyone veto power. Veto power is the only thing that matters in UNSC.

Wait for the Indian-bots to start crying in.....3.....2.....1

 

[The BrOkEn HeArT]

Only democratic country should be part of UNSC. India is not in hurry to get permanent seat in SC. India is maintaining peace in the region and in the world without getting any seat. It is time to improve our economy , right now India don't want to interfere in other countries affairs. So no need such power.

 

[Providence]

Lots of foreign policy activism or lack thereof in case of India is driven by domestic sensitivities. With such a situation, India cannot be allowed to be a part of UNSC. Plain and simple.

On that table for big boys, we take decisions based on collective agreements and with a principle of give and take irrespective of how much fierce differences we have outside the table. India (when it talks about a diligent track record also brings with it a track record of dilly dallying indecisive behaviour ). Once again I must stress, UNSC cannot be a hostage to domestic turmoil in some place.

Also, India playing neutral most of the time hardly brings any marginal benefit in the working of UNSC.

We might reconsider after maybe 15 years.

 

[badguy2000]

Only democratic country should be part of UNSC. India is not in hurry to get permanent seat in SC. India is maintaining peace in the region and in the world without getting any seat. It is time to improve our economy , right now India don't want to interfere in other countries affairs. So no need such power.

"democratic UNSC" is not UN,but G7.

it has existed for decades......

if so, India has not been offter a seat of G7,purely because India's backward economy does not deserve it.

 

[Star Wars]

Lots of foreign policy activism or lack thereof in case of India is driven by domestic sensitivities. With such a situation, India cannot be allowed to be a part of UNSC. Plain and simple.

On that table for big boys, we take decisions based on collective agreements and with a principle of give and take irrespective of how much fierce differences we have outside the table. India (when it talks about a diligent track record also brings with it a track record of dilly dallying indecisive behaviour ). Once again I must stress, UNSC cannot be a hostage to domestic turmoil in some place.

Also, India playing neutral most of the time hardly brings any marginal benefit in the working of UNSC.

We might reconsider after maybe 15 years.

When was the last time UNSC did anything right to begin with ? I have been saying form the very beginning, this organization is useless. India should just let i t be...

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Washington is willing to consider specific countries for entry into the UNSC... But it will not agree to "any alteration or expansion of the veto".

This is the key part.

They will not agree to "any alteration or expansion of the veto".

Obviously. Why would any of the P5 members dilute their own power like that?

And a UNSC seat means nothing without veto power.

 

[Economic superpower]

Victory for China

No veto for you India

 

[Providence]

When was the last time UNSC did anything right to begin with ? I have been saying form the very beginning, this organization is useless. India should just let i t be...

Okay. Please just let it be..

I have always asked what marginal benefit would india being a member of UNSC bring to the organisation ? The answer I got was - a billion people would be represented. To me those facts doesn't matter. A failing country like Italy with 100 times less population has similar GDP as you guys.

"democratic UNSC" is not UN,but G7.

it has existed for decades......

if so, India has not been offter a seat of G7,purely because India's backward economy does not deserve it.

That's because India is not in top7 world economies in nominal terms. It's not a rocket science. Why is india complaining I don't understand.