Immediate situation post-1947 independence Wikipedia
The Chinese Premier is about to visit Bharat. Delhi wonders if China will straddle the fence, or support Bharat’s global’s aspirations.
Indian officials are about to get seduced by a UNSC seat appeal during Chmn Hu Jin Taos visit.
http://ishare.rediff.com/video/entertainment/india-not-downplaying-threat-perception-from-china/713310
P. Stobdan describes the threats to Bharat in the following manner. “External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee‘s recent outburst that China poses a security challenge indicates a dangerous ambiguity in India’s China policy. The fact that Mukherjee has aired such a view after his intense and long diplomatic rapport with the leadership of that country needs to be noted seriously. It is not that China has not been a puzzle to Indian strategic thinkers. Even former Defence Minister George Fernandes considered China as India’s number one enemy, but his views were transformed after he paid an official visit to Beijing.”
Western countries’ concern over China’s rapid development, which they consider ‘a threat’, won’t deter the country from contributing to world peace, experts have said.
Shanghai Daily, in an article on its opinion page, said in the face of concerns by some Western countries about China’s ongoing development, which they think is `a threat’, Chinese experts stressed the country will pursue a path of peaceful development.
The article comes a day after US President Barack Obama announced in New Delhi support to India for a permanent seat in the UN Security Council. He also signed $15 billion worth of trade deals during his Nov 6-9 India visit. Obama is on a Asia trip during which he will also go to Indonesia, South Korea and Japan.
Shi Yongming, a research fellow at the Department for International Strategic Studies of the China Institute of International Studies, a key government think tank, said: ‘China’s development depends on world peace and it will contribute to world peace.’
Shi said that to foster global peace, China has given priority to ‘mutually beneficial cooperation’, which is an effective way to tackle disputes in international relations.
The country’s economy witnessed an annual growth of 11.4 percent on average during the first four years of the 11th Five-year Program (2006-10). The first half of this year saw an 11.1 percent growth, ‘outshining the pace of developed nations’, a media report said.
It quoted President Hu Jintao as saying recently: ‘China respects the right of the people of other countries to choose their own path of development.’
‘China will never interfere in other countries’ internal affairs, never impose its own will on others, and is dedicated to peaceful settlements of international conflicts.’
Gao Zugui, director of the Institute of World Politics of the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, said China’s development path was ‘completely different from the growth mode of some Western powers‘.
China would ‘never follow the footsteps of Western nations that sought hegemony once they grew strong’, Gao said, adding that China’s growth would ‘never harm or pose a threat to anyone’.
Zhou Qingan, a research fellow at the Center for International Communication Studies at Tsinghua University, observed that while China’s influence would continue to grow in the future, Western nations would become more ‘worried and vigilant’ about China’s growth, and voices would arise calling on China to ‘shoulder more responsibilities’ and ‘play more important roles’. Beijing, Nov 9 (IANS)
China is extremely astute at managing their strategic interests. One must not forget their indulgences have been in and around India for the past sixty years. Bharat’s inflammatory statements regarding Beijing surely didn’t help.External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee’s recent outburst that China poses a security challenge indicates a dangerous ambiguity in India’s China policy. The fact that Mukherjee has aired such a view after his intense and long diplomatic rapport with the leadership of that country needs to be noted seriously. It is not that China has not been a puzzle to Indian strategic thinkers. Even former Defence Minister George Fernandes considered China as India’s number one enemy, but his views were transformed after he paid an official visit to Beijing.
Bharat’s threat perception of China is as follows:
P Stobdan describes the threats “What may have irked Mukherjee the most is China’s renewed bid to thwart India’s chance to find a permanent seat in the UNSC. In fact, soon after the NSG episode, China attended a closed door meeting on September 26 of the ‘Coffee Club’ countries chaired by Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini that opposed the UNGA’s efforts to forge a consensus on UNSC expansion. As the UNGA sets February 29, 2009 as the deadline for the negotiations, China is expected to lobby openly against the G4’s (Germany, Brazil, India, and Japan) formula for a consensus on the expansion model. This is yet another proof of China backtracking from its earlier stated position to support India’s aspirations to enter the UNSC.”
(1) The construction of dams in the Himalayan region to divert water flowing in to India. Bharatis this is their most important strategic control move. Bharatis think that the dams will effect agriculture, business and socially politically and militarily.
P Stobdan says “Interestingly, Pranab Mukherjee also referred to the Prime Minister’s growing concerns on the future of trans-border rivers during his visit to China last month. In the coming years, China’s surprise actions in the Himalayas could bring fresh shivers in New Delhi. Despite Beijing’s denial, China is likely to go ahead with the project to divert the Brahmaputra as early as next year or by 2010. The Indian media recently missed the news that PLA engineers on October 14 have resumed a major strategic road construction programme to link Tibet’s last road-less Medog County from where the Brahmaputra takes a U-turn at the Great Bend and enters Arunachal Pradesh. The road project is linked to a dam construction plan at the Yalung Tsangpo River, aimed at diverting a major portion of its waters (200 billion cubic metres) to Northern China.
China’s propensity for big hydro projects to support its hyper economic growth could portend real time and unthinkable catastrophe of water stress for downstream countries”
(2) Bharati’s fear the construction of tunnels and support of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan. Delhi fear Beijing’s de facto control of Nepal and assimilation of Tibet. Delhi fears the threat from the southern border where China has ostensibly gotten a lot of influence in Sri Lanka. Of course Delhi is chagrined at Beijing’s strategic friendship with Pakistan on what some think as Indias Northwest. Delhi is also scared of Chinese inroads into and around Indias Northeast border in South Timet (Arunchal Pradesh), Assam, West Bengal etc.
P Stobdan says “Building the railway to Tibet was clearly meant to resolve China’s water dilemma. Many environmentalists and security experts feel that China is circumspect about Tibet’s hydro resources. The issue is politically sensitive and therefore does not get enough attention, but it is fraught with critical strategic importance. India’s traditional response to trans-border issues has been meek so far, perhaps daunted by the fear of China’s quick mobilization in Tibet. Beijing has been avoiding an agreement on the protection of the trans-Himalayan Rivers and has limited its cooperation with India to sharing of hydrological data. Any intention to extend the velvet glove to Beijing would amount to chopping off the tree branch India is sitting on. The Economist Prime Minister surely understands the implications. As we move ahead into 2009, there would be several such incidents cropping up, which would strike at the core of mutual trust that was supposed to have been built painstakingly over the years between India and China.”
Delhi frets the communist Naxal movements all-over India.
(4) Bharat is scared of the recent cyber attacks on India’s security information
(5) Bharat frets China’s world stature in Africa, Asia and the Middleast. Its recent foray in becoming a less expensive arms supplier is considered toxic on multiple fronts.
Bharat Verma says “The Indians unwittingly made the Chinese task a cakewalk as they were preoccupied with internal bickering for short-term personal gains, overlooking the vicious expansionist agenda designed jointly by Beijing and Islamabad [ Images ] to tear apart the country.
Even as it pretended to withdraw its covert support to the rebels in India’s northeast in the late seventies, China took advantage of Islamabad’s hatred for India, and deftly invested in Pakistan to carry out the task on its behalf.
The primary segment of the Chinese strategy moved with clockwork precision by investing in autocratic and Islamic fundamentalist elements in countries on India’s periphery — Myanmar, Bangladesh and the Maoists in Nepal.
In Sri Lanka [ Images ], while Indians dithered, Beijing and its proxy Pakistan quickly moved in to help arm Colombo against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, develop the Hambantota port etc.
While the adversary invested in encircling India on its land and sea frontiers, the Indians merrily continued to indulge in their favorite past time — meaningless and endless debates.”
Bharati analysts feel that by garnishing a $200 billion trade deficit with the USA it has economically “neutralized” the US its only effective hurdle to world domination. Bharat has tried to tell the US that China has its sights on America’s military prowess globally.
Bharatis see the dependence of Europe and the US on its arms base for other countries lays the foundation for supplies, ammunition, etc in future and dependence. Bharatis describe this akin to distributing free drugs to kids. In Delhi’s parnoia Pakistan is seen as a tool for China.
http://www.jstor.org/pss/652508
