Schumacher
New Member
It's not so much China's goal is to become a superpower, more like she'll most likely become one just by following its natural course of development.Big-E said:
The biggest obstacle is US far more than India.
How effectivley could India "counter balance" China?
- Thread starter long live usa
- Start date
The biggest obstacle is US far more than India.
IMO the US is not an obstacle to China becoming a superpower. If it wasn't for the US massive trade deficit with that country they would be 20yrs behind where they are economically. Without her massive economic potential she would not even be considered a 2nd tier power. So in retrospect I say the US is fueling the PRC to superpower status, not hindering her. China's primary concern at the moment is regional hegemony, they have shown time and time again that they want to dominate Asia and there only two players that rival her, Japan and India.Schumacher said:It's not so much China's goal is to become a superpower, more like she'll most likely become one just by following its natural course of development.
The biggest obstacle is US far more than India.
hey guys check out this article on chinese awacs crash,pretty interesting ,shows advantages and disadvantages of humint and elint.
here check out this link: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19439361-31477,00.html
Sabotage fear as China's secret weapon crashes
A DULL boom shook the misty bamboo forests of Guangde county, 200km southwest of Shanghai, last Sunday week and a plume of smoke rose in the sky.
Within 24 hours, China admitted that a "military aircraft" had crashed, that President Hu Jintao had ordered an investigation and that state honours would be bestowed on the victims.
Security teams sealed off the area, carting away the charred remains of 40 people and collecting wreckage with painstaking care. It looked like a routine military accident.
In fact, the crash would reverberate through Washington and Tel Aviv, revealing details of a covert Chinese espionage effort to copy Israeli technology in an attempt to match the US in any future air and sea battle.
The first clues were given by two Chinese-controlled newspapers in Hong Kong, Ta Kung Pao and Wen Wei Po. On Monday, they printed articles disclosing that the plane was a Chinese version of the formidable Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) aircraft flown by the US to manage air, sea and land battles.
They indicated it was a Russian Ilyushin cargo jet, rebuilt to house a conspicuous array of radars and codenamed KJ-2000. The doomed flight, they implied, had been a test mission.
The disaster robbed China of 35 of its best electronic warfare technicians, according to sources in Hong Kong. There were also five crew on board.
With memories fresh in Beijing that a Boeing 767 bought for the use of former president Jiang Zemin was found to be riddled with eavesdropping devices, there were suspicions of sabotage.
The Communist Party showed how seriously it took the crash by entrusting the inquiry to Guo Boxiong, vice-chairman of its central military commission, who handles sensitive security matters.
It was without question a calamity for the Chinese military. But for the Americans, who lost a spy plane forced down by a Chinese interceptor jet in 2000, it was not a cause for sincere mourning. The US Seventh Fleet is ranged off the Chinese coast, in constant contact with Chinese planes and submarines probing its readiness to defend the self-ruled democracy on Taiwan.
The US and Taiwan spend undisclosed billions trying to penetrate the secrecy surrounding China's military build-up.
Chinese spies in Taiwan are known to have scored remarkable successes. In one recent case reported by The Washington Post, they placed in their President's hands the proceedings of a secret standing committee meeting on Taiwan policy within days of its taking place.
American intelligence, by contrast, concentrates on a war fought with science and stealth to preserve its technological advantage. For as long as the Chinese have tried to buy, steal or copy high-grade military technology -- at least since the early 1990s -- the CIA and the White House have sought to frustrate them.
China relies on foreign know-how. British propellers from the Dowty company are fitted to its Y-8 early warning aircraft and radars made by Racal Electronics are installed on its naval surveillance planes. But the crown jewels of electronic warfare are made in the US, which means that China's hunger for secrets can be exploited by its foes.
Late in the Cold War, the CIA supplied faulty computer items to the Soviets, which resulted in death and destruction. So, suspicions of treachery in Beijing are bound to be reinforced by the tale of intrigue and deception that unfolded on examination of what led to the KJ-2000 crash.
Late last year, the local aviation authorities, which in China are controlled by the military, bought sophisticated Monopulse secondary surveillance radars from Telephonics Corp, a subsidiary of the Griffon Corporation, which supplies the US AWACS fleet.
The radars were due for delivery early this year. Their purpose was stated to be civil aviation, but critics in US Congress say the Chinese buy such items for "dual use" in military systems. According to specifications published by the Federation of American Scientists, such radars can be closely integrated with an AWACS plane to enhance targets. There is now speculation among military attaches in the region that the KJ-2000 may have been testing an unproven capability of this nature when it crashed.
here check out this link: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19439361-31477,00.html
Sabotage fear as China's secret weapon crashes
A DULL boom shook the misty bamboo forests of Guangde county, 200km southwest of Shanghai, last Sunday week and a plume of smoke rose in the sky.
Within 24 hours, China admitted that a "military aircraft" had crashed, that President Hu Jintao had ordered an investigation and that state honours would be bestowed on the victims.
Security teams sealed off the area, carting away the charred remains of 40 people and collecting wreckage with painstaking care. It looked like a routine military accident.
In fact, the crash would reverberate through Washington and Tel Aviv, revealing details of a covert Chinese espionage effort to copy Israeli technology in an attempt to match the US in any future air and sea battle.
The first clues were given by two Chinese-controlled newspapers in Hong Kong, Ta Kung Pao and Wen Wei Po. On Monday, they printed articles disclosing that the plane was a Chinese version of the formidable Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) aircraft flown by the US to manage air, sea and land battles.
They indicated it was a Russian Ilyushin cargo jet, rebuilt to house a conspicuous array of radars and codenamed KJ-2000. The doomed flight, they implied, had been a test mission.
The disaster robbed China of 35 of its best electronic warfare technicians, according to sources in Hong Kong. There were also five crew on board.
With memories fresh in Beijing that a Boeing 767 bought for the use of former president Jiang Zemin was found to be riddled with eavesdropping devices, there were suspicions of sabotage.
The Communist Party showed how seriously it took the crash by entrusting the inquiry to Guo Boxiong, vice-chairman of its central military commission, who handles sensitive security matters.
It was without question a calamity for the Chinese military. But for the Americans, who lost a spy plane forced down by a Chinese interceptor jet in 2000, it was not a cause for sincere mourning. The US Seventh Fleet is ranged off the Chinese coast, in constant contact with Chinese planes and submarines probing its readiness to defend the self-ruled democracy on Taiwan.
The US and Taiwan spend undisclosed billions trying to penetrate the secrecy surrounding China's military build-up.
Chinese spies in Taiwan are known to have scored remarkable successes. In one recent case reported by The Washington Post, they placed in their President's hands the proceedings of a secret standing committee meeting on Taiwan policy within days of its taking place.
American intelligence, by contrast, concentrates on a war fought with science and stealth to preserve its technological advantage. For as long as the Chinese have tried to buy, steal or copy high-grade military technology -- at least since the early 1990s -- the CIA and the White House have sought to frustrate them.
China relies on foreign know-how. British propellers from the Dowty company are fitted to its Y-8 early warning aircraft and radars made by Racal Electronics are installed on its naval surveillance planes. But the crown jewels of electronic warfare are made in the US, which means that China's hunger for secrets can be exploited by its foes.
Late in the Cold War, the CIA supplied faulty computer items to the Soviets, which resulted in death and destruction. So, suspicions of treachery in Beijing are bound to be reinforced by the tale of intrigue and deception that unfolded on examination of what led to the KJ-2000 crash.
Late last year, the local aviation authorities, which in China are controlled by the military, bought sophisticated Monopulse secondary surveillance radars from Telephonics Corp, a subsidiary of the Griffon Corporation, which supplies the US AWACS fleet.
The radars were due for delivery early this year. Their purpose was stated to be civil aviation, but critics in US Congress say the Chinese buy such items for "dual use" in military systems. According to specifications published by the Federation of American Scientists, such radars can be closely integrated with an AWACS plane to enhance targets. There is now speculation among military attaches in the region that the KJ-2000 may have been testing an unproven capability of this nature when it crashed.
this crash has been discussed to death on CDF and SDF. It's clear that the plane that crashed is a Y-8 platform, not KJ-2000. The entire article doesn't show much credibility as far as I'm concerned. Neither does any of the other Western articles I've read regarding to the accident, but this one seems to be making up more stuff than the other ones.aaaditya said:hey guys check out this article on chinese awacs crash,pretty interesting ,shows advantages and disadvantages of humint and elint.
here check out this link: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19439361-31477,00.html
Sabotage fear as China's secret weapon crashes
A DULL boom shook the misty bamboo forests of Guangde county, 200km southwest of Shanghai, last Sunday week and a plume of smoke rose in the sky.
Within 24 hours, China admitted that a "military aircraft" had crashed, that President Hu Jintao had ordered an investigation and that state honours would be bestowed on the victims.
Security teams sealed off the area, carting away the charred remains of 40 people and collecting wreckage with painstaking care. It looked like a routine military accident.
In fact, the crash would reverberate through Washington and Tel Aviv, revealing details of a covert Chinese espionage effort to copy Israeli technology in an attempt to match the US in any future air and sea battle.
The first clues were given by two Chinese-controlled newspapers in Hong Kong, Ta Kung Pao and Wen Wei Po. On Monday, they printed articles disclosing that the plane was a Chinese version of the formidable Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) aircraft flown by the US to manage air, sea and land battles.
They indicated it was a Russian Ilyushin cargo jet, rebuilt to house a conspicuous array of radars and codenamed KJ-2000. The doomed flight, they implied, had been a test mission.
The disaster robbed China of 35 of its best electronic warfare technicians, according to sources in Hong Kong. There were also five crew on board.
With memories fresh in Beijing that a Boeing 767 bought for the use of former president Jiang Zemin was found to be riddled with eavesdropping devices, there were suspicions of sabotage.
The Communist Party showed how seriously it took the crash by entrusting the inquiry to Guo Boxiong, vice-chairman of its central military commission, who handles sensitive security matters.
It was without question a calamity for the Chinese military. But for the Americans, who lost a spy plane forced down by a Chinese interceptor jet in 2000, it was not a cause for sincere mourning. The US Seventh Fleet is ranged off the Chinese coast, in constant contact with Chinese planes and submarines probing its readiness to defend the self-ruled democracy on Taiwan.
The US and Taiwan spend undisclosed billions trying to penetrate the secrecy surrounding China's military build-up.
Chinese spies in Taiwan are known to have scored remarkable successes. In one recent case reported by The Washington Post, they placed in their President's hands the proceedings of a secret standing committee meeting on Taiwan policy within days of its taking place.
American intelligence, by contrast, concentrates on a war fought with science and stealth to preserve its technological advantage. For as long as the Chinese have tried to buy, steal or copy high-grade military technology -- at least since the early 1990s -- the CIA and the White House have sought to frustrate them.
China relies on foreign know-how. British propellers from the Dowty company are fitted to its Y-8 early warning aircraft and radars made by Racal Electronics are installed on its naval surveillance planes. But the crown jewels of electronic warfare are made in the US, which means that China's hunger for secrets can be exploited by its foes.
Late in the Cold War, the CIA supplied faulty computer items to the Soviets, which resulted in death and destruction. So, suspicions of treachery in Beijing are bound to be reinforced by the tale of intrigue and deception that unfolded on examination of what led to the KJ-2000 crash.
Late last year, the local aviation authorities, which in China are controlled by the military, bought sophisticated Monopulse secondary surveillance radars from Telephonics Corp, a subsidiary of the Griffon Corporation, which supplies the US AWACS fleet.
The radars were due for delivery early this year. Their purpose was stated to be civil aviation, but critics in US Congress say the Chinese buy such items for "dual use" in military systems. According to specifications published by the Federation of American Scientists, such radars can be closely integrated with an AWACS plane to enhance targets. There is now speculation among military attaches in the region that the KJ-2000 may have been testing an unproven capability of this nature when it crashed.
long live usa
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #25
the aircraft was actually transporting.............big foot:eek :shuddertphuang said:this crash has been discussed to death on CDF and SDF. It's clear that the plane that crashed is a Y-8 platform, not KJ-2000. The entire article doesn't show much credibility as far as I'm concerned. Neither does any of the other Western articles I've read regarding to the accident, but this one seems to be making up more stuff than the other ones.
also has india given up on its arjun MBT?
it's most likely the Y-8 balance beam AEW, also known as KJ-200 within China.long live usa said:the aircraft was actually transporting.............big foot:eek :shudder
also has india given up on its arjun MBT?
Singapores territorial waters don't reach the Indonesian coast, so Singapore doesn't have a veto on traffic through the Malacca straits. Nor is it the only route. For example, there is the Sunda strait. Indonesia controls most of the routes between the Indian Ocean & South China Sea. Chinese & Indian submarines could probably pass through some of the straits undetected. Lots of them, little Indonesian anti-submarine capability.Snayke said:I don't think their navies would even reach each other. Singapore would want to stay out of the conflict, thus letting either in would make it seem like they were aiding one side. It would be totally army and air force I reckon.
Also, Gwadar has been mentioned, & China has been cultivating Myanmar, & sending warships on visits. If a war were to break out between China & India, it's possible that some Chinese warships might be in the Indian Ocean.
Well i think.
there can be a economic counter balance, a strategic military counter balance.
as for china and India ending up in a military conflict, the possibility is minimal as the economic losses in the long term are so great (even if we consider a reduction in mutual trade) that both of the nations will never consider a military option, however given that as it is, the effectiveness remains in a military manner.
if both the nations have similar military capabilities then a military partnership of India-another nation, china-another nation will really make the whole region very unstable indeed. On the global political scenario-the economic influence in the whole SAARC-ASEAN region, if India and china become economically-militarily-diplomatically strong nations then a third nation from outside the region (USA, Russia, France etc. etc.) will prefer to give its support to one of these nations and gain a lot of ground in the region.
However the whole thing contains a lot of ifs and buts, and further if India and China both become strong economic powers, with the population that they have they can effectively become the economic engines of the region (produce a lot consume a lot), increase bilateral trade by huge amounts and almost become codependent.
China is almost there, India can get there.
A strong India will translate into a huge market next door to china only if the relations are good enough to allow free trade policies to form.
A strong China will be good for India only if India is strong enough
Some interesting links
China-India Relations: not independent of US-China relations
http://www.saag.org/papers2/paper172.htm
China-India relations: best yet to come
http://english.people.com.cn/200611/20/eng20061120_323327.html
India China Economy - Trade Relations
http://www.economywatch.com/world_economy/china/indo-china-trade-relations.html
China, India renew aviation agreement
http://www.chinaembassy.org.in/eng/ssygd/zygx/t191746.htm
Mod Warning: funtz; what is with you & paragraphing or rather not-paragraphing. It really makes your post uninteresting to read. You should go through all of DT's rules. You were warned for this by Aussie Digger & this is your last warning.
there can be a economic counter balance, a strategic military counter balance.
as for china and India ending up in a military conflict, the possibility is minimal as the economic losses in the long term are so great (even if we consider a reduction in mutual trade) that both of the nations will never consider a military option, however given that as it is, the effectiveness remains in a military manner.
if both the nations have similar military capabilities then a military partnership of India-another nation, china-another nation will really make the whole region very unstable indeed. On the global political scenario-the economic influence in the whole SAARC-ASEAN region, if India and china become economically-militarily-diplomatically strong nations then a third nation from outside the region (USA, Russia, France etc. etc.) will prefer to give its support to one of these nations and gain a lot of ground in the region.
However the whole thing contains a lot of ifs and buts, and further if India and China both become strong economic powers, with the population that they have they can effectively become the economic engines of the region (produce a lot consume a lot), increase bilateral trade by huge amounts and almost become codependent.
China is almost there, India can get there.
A strong India will translate into a huge market next door to china only if the relations are good enough to allow free trade policies to form.
A strong China will be good for India only if India is strong enough
Some interesting links
China-India Relations: not independent of US-China relations
http://www.saag.org/papers2/paper172.htm
China-India relations: best yet to come
http://english.people.com.cn/200611/20/eng20061120_323327.html
India China Economy - Trade Relations
http://www.economywatch.com/world_economy/china/indo-china-trade-relations.html
China, India renew aviation agreement
http://www.chinaembassy.org.in/eng/ssygd/zygx/t191746.htm
Mod Warning: funtz; what is with you & paragraphing or rather not-paragraphing. It really makes your post uninteresting to read. You should go through all of DT's rules. You were warned for this by Aussie Digger & this is your last warning.
Last edited:
Incognito129
Banned Member
You cannot bring in someone under your sphere of influence when they are 3-4 times larger than you.It's interesting, USA is clearly trying to get the Japan, Australia and India into its sphere of countering China. China is obviously trying to break that. Now, Japan and China will always hate each other, so it's basically down to persuading Australia and India. So far, it seems like China is in certain ways trying to buy off India and Australia with the economic charm. We will see.
As for China is at a disadvantage with the tech support, I think that's overrated. In general, China is looking to be self-sufficient in terms of defence. You can see that its military import has pretty much been decreasing the last few years. And many of its indigenous systems got developed because it was embargoed.
There was a very informative discussion now available online on the Non-Traditional Security and International Cooperation between China and India,
Article no: 2390
Date: 10 October 2007
Speaker:
Prof. Wang Dehua, Director, Institute of South and Central Asia Studies, Shanghai
Perhaps related to the argument of a counter balance to china in the region.
From a Indian prospective, a greater engagement with China will in my opinion be far more benifitial than a " counter balance" scenario, pherhaps benificial enough to negate the need for counter-balancing.
Far deeper implications exist in the mother of all rivalries, "resources", here the combined population of India and China has ensured that a competitive resource market becomes even more competitive, in these area's there has been interesting developments that have come with in my narrow vision, Cooperation between the two can result in a very effective "counter- balance" to the resource dominance of some powers, may be this counter-balance will be more effective than the India counter-balance to the Chinese diplomatic, military and economic developments in the region.
I will collect the possible avenues and existing ventures and post them.
Article no: 2390
Date: 10 October 2007
Speaker:
Prof. Wang Dehua, Director, Institute of South and Central Asia Studies, Shanghai
source: http://www.ipcs.org/newIpcsSeminars2.jsp?action=showView&kValue=2406Concluding remarks:
China and India should cooperate with each other to prevent the mutual conversion of both traditional security problems and non-traditional security problems. The emphasis on non-traditional security does not mean the reduction of the significance of traditional security and vice-versa. On 14 March 2005, Premier Wen Jibao said "May we work jointly with great effort, may our study be vigorous and effective. May we not hate anyone. Let there be peace, let there be peace."
Perhaps related to the argument of a counter balance to china in the region.
From a Indian prospective, a greater engagement with China will in my opinion be far more benifitial than a " counter balance" scenario, pherhaps benificial enough to negate the need for counter-balancing.
Far deeper implications exist in the mother of all rivalries, "resources", here the combined population of India and China has ensured that a competitive resource market becomes even more competitive, in these area's there has been interesting developments that have come with in my narrow vision, Cooperation between the two can result in a very effective "counter- balance" to the resource dominance of some powers, may be this counter-balance will be more effective than the India counter-balance to the Chinese diplomatic, military and economic developments in the region.
I will collect the possible avenues and existing ventures and post them.
Londo Molari
New Member
Thats how I see it. Militarily, India is a big counter to China already. But China is years ahead of India in its economic and technological development.Not very well. I see both countries becoming more friendly
Hindi Chini Bhai Bhai
Though both countries are destined to become world powers, China will get there first, and when it does, we will see its military jump way ahead of India's.
Either way, they are likely to be allies in the future.
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
There was a very informative discussion now available online on the Non-Traditional Security and International Cooperation between China and India,
Article no: 2390
Date: 10 October 2007
Speaker:
Prof. Wang Dehua, Director, Institute of South and Central Asia Studies, Shanghai
source: http://www.ipcs.org/newIpcsSeminars2.jsp?action=showView&kValue=2406
Perhaps related to the argument of a counter balance to china in the region.
From a Indian prospective, a greater engagement with China will in my opinion be far more benifitial than a " counter balance" scenario, pherhaps benificial enough to negate the need for counter-balancing.
Far deeper implications exist in the mother of all rivalries, "resources", here the combined population of India and China has ensured that a competitive resource market becomes even more competitive, in these area's there has been interesting developments that have come with in my narrow vision, Cooperation between the two can result in a very effective "counter- balance" to the resource dominance of some powers, may be this counter-balance will be more effective than the India counter-balance to the Chinese diplomatic, military and economic developments in the region.
I will collect the possible avenues and existing ventures and post them.
The simple fact of the matter is that India and China have conflicting strategic objectives and interests, and therefore due to their size and comperable capabilities, one will automaticaly counterballance the other, in political, economic and military terms. They will be co-dependent economically, however this is to some extent a moot point because most economic powers in asia or indeed the world are co-dependant, this however does not mean that world peice has been achieved.
You will see India move to a Japan/US/Australian alliance because their strategic interests are the same, and they are a liberal democracy. There seems to be a patern that ideologically similar nations tend to gravitate towards each other, and this can be seen with single party/stalinist dictatorship's and oligharchies in China, Burma, and to a lesser extent Pakistan. I think an alliance of non muslim (i doubt they would want to join), liberal democratic nations in geater asia, including SEA, is not out of the question, especially with a "communist" (can you really call them communist anymore, economic capitalism and all) nation that will militarily rival anyone in the region in 20 years.
Well in the field of energy cooperation there has been some small amount of cooperation in International market, and the story is kind of old and well covered from 2003-05.
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_06/b3919100_mz015.htm
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200601/13/eng20060113_235097.html
http://www.hindu.com/2006/01/13/stories/2006011318821400.htm
The Myanmar situation showed that there will be blood drawn in such efforts (according to GAIL, it's offer was considered profitable however nothing really happened)
http://www.shwe.org/docs/india-to-continue-to-buy-gas-from-myanmar/
There has been movement towards a better understanding of the Boundary Disputes and landmark decisions have been reached which changed the status quo about Chinese position on Sikkim, and Indian position on Tibet(resulted in some protests in Delhi). This too is old news now. If nothing else than atleast compared to the 80's the border is a calm peaceful place now.
There have been diplomatic steps taken forward, which is always good.
That being said, these were the bare minimum diplomatic steps that were required and nothing truly "Policy changing", has occurred.
Economy alone will not amount to everything, as you said if that was the case the whole world will be more peaceful place.
A higher percentage of fellow country-men around me, who follows the news seem to agree that there is a planned Chinese strategy to limit India through Myanmar-Bangladesh-Sri Lanka- Maldives-Pakistan chain, and that not enough is being done about it by the government.
So if that is anything to go by(as a scale of national will/inclination), India is not only ready, it is waiting for such a Alliance to come up in SEA-Asia-world stage. I wish i knew what the Chinese populace though of this, again not certain that will help in judging the overall scenario.
(Bhutan is the only Nation that according to some is a true friend, which if true is all the criticism that the policy makers need before committing harakiri).
Then there is the real big question the River, people seem to underestimate the real value of it.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/522947.cms
This can stop all progress and make sure that the border become active again, and potentially bring about an end to all efforts, if the Chinese recognize this they will be more careful
The most recent event has been the alleged incursion of Chinese troops in Bhutan to bring about a settlement in the Border dispute.
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2007/20071010/main2.htm
The real value for very strong movements by India towards a counterbalance to China, in my opinion will be that India will show potential situations this all could lead too, the value of stability, which will eventually lead to a more peaceful scenario.
The way things are shaping up very soon India will feel more paranoid about Chinese presence around her, what possible advantage that will have for China still beats me.
Through some careful diplomatic maneuvering a very peaceful era can come into the picture (for example Chinese disengagement from the so called "string of pearls" which is threatening India, and followed immediately by Indian-Chinese active cooperation in the Indian Ocean region), However that carries no benefits as of now for China or India.
A understanding of mutually beneficial tie ups and sharing of available resources is also necessary, if its going to be a daggers in hand situation, it will only result in aforementioned "blood drawn", this also provides a window of opportunity for engaging in a policy shift, if the option is practiced that is.
As it is both the nations can not really do anything that will give them any edge over each other, militarily or diplomatically.
There is the string of pearls, people here seem to talk/worry about, can be negated through diplomatic efforts (Pakistan-India relations are what they are and will remain so).
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_06/b3919100_mz015.htm
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200601/13/eng20060113_235097.html
http://www.hindu.com/2006/01/13/stories/2006011318821400.htm
The Myanmar situation showed that there will be blood drawn in such efforts (according to GAIL, it's offer was considered profitable however nothing really happened)
http://www.shwe.org/docs/india-to-continue-to-buy-gas-from-myanmar/
There has been movement towards a better understanding of the Boundary Disputes and landmark decisions have been reached which changed the status quo about Chinese position on Sikkim, and Indian position on Tibet(resulted in some protests in Delhi). This too is old news now. If nothing else than atleast compared to the 80's the border is a calm peaceful place now.
There have been diplomatic steps taken forward, which is always good.
That being said, these were the bare minimum diplomatic steps that were required and nothing truly "Policy changing", has occurred.
I really am willing to read a 1000 page book if there is an answer to that question.(can you really call them communist anymore, economic capitalism and all)
I hope so, that will bring in more investment and in turn give a boost to India becoming more 'liberal'.You will see India move to a Japan/US/Australian alliance because their strategic interests are the same, and they are a liberal democracy.
Economy alone will not amount to everything, as you said if that was the case the whole world will be more peaceful place.
A higher percentage of fellow country-men around me, who follows the news seem to agree that there is a planned Chinese strategy to limit India through Myanmar-Bangladesh-Sri Lanka- Maldives-Pakistan chain, and that not enough is being done about it by the government.
So if that is anything to go by(as a scale of national will/inclination), India is not only ready, it is waiting for such a Alliance to come up in SEA-Asia-world stage. I wish i knew what the Chinese populace though of this, again not certain that will help in judging the overall scenario.
(Bhutan is the only Nation that according to some is a true friend, which if true is all the criticism that the policy makers need before committing harakiri).
Then there is the real big question the River, people seem to underestimate the real value of it.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/522947.cms
This can stop all progress and make sure that the border become active again, and potentially bring about an end to all efforts, if the Chinese recognize this they will be more careful
The most recent event has been the alleged incursion of Chinese troops in Bhutan to bring about a settlement in the Border dispute.
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2007/20071010/main2.htm
The real value for very strong movements by India towards a counterbalance to China, in my opinion will be that India will show potential situations this all could lead too, the value of stability, which will eventually lead to a more peaceful scenario.
The way things are shaping up very soon India will feel more paranoid about Chinese presence around her, what possible advantage that will have for China still beats me.
Through some careful diplomatic maneuvering a very peaceful era can come into the picture (for example Chinese disengagement from the so called "string of pearls" which is threatening India, and followed immediately by Indian-Chinese active cooperation in the Indian Ocean region), However that carries no benefits as of now for China or India.
A understanding of mutually beneficial tie ups and sharing of available resources is also necessary, if its going to be a daggers in hand situation, it will only result in aforementioned "blood drawn", this also provides a window of opportunity for engaging in a policy shift, if the option is practiced that is.
As it is both the nations can not really do anything that will give them any edge over each other, militarily or diplomatically.
There is the string of pearls, people here seem to talk/worry about, can be negated through diplomatic efforts (Pakistan-India relations are what they are and will remain so).
Last edited: