US and PRC relationship & India

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 14 Jun 2010 05:55

Alexander's encounter was not normatizing and hence did not leave is mark on India. Same with many other invaders,; Kushans, Parthians, Scythians, Indoo_Greeks etc., till the Turko invasions of the 12th century an the European colonizations.

chanakyaa · Post by **chanakyaa** » 14 Jun 2010 07:44

^^^ Civilizational-psyche wise, its in India's best interests to align with China. The problems we have today is political and temporal in nature. Once the CPC tones down or may be replaced, it will go away. The Abrahamic/European societies are far more ruthless in their "pursuit of happiness".

I've little difficulty understanding this concept. What is the meaning of "Civilizational-psyche" in the context of foreign affairs? And, Which one of India's interests will be served by aligning with PRC? "Political", "Security Related", "Economy related", or is it just blind opposition to whatever "west" does? And may I ask, "how" does it serve these interests? And finally, what does "alignment" mean in practice?

Our problems are "political" and "temporal"? "Political", agree "in part", but "temporal"?

Can you explain, what is it that we are waiting for the CPC to "tone down" or "replace"?

For "pursuit of happiness" thingy, I don't know what to say, but I made a list of all modern inventions from penicillin, refrigerator, satellites and the Internet, which were direct result of the same "pursuit of happiness", and I couldn't find a single thing "Dharmic" people could be proud of inventing.....

naren · Post by **naren** » 14 Jun 2010 09:11

chaanakya wrote:
naren wrote:
Abrahamic societies have no concept of Karma or Reincarnation. You have only one shot at life. After that, eternal hell or eternal heaven. So you gotta make the maximum out of this life. This belief drives people into desperation & unbridled enjoymentism. You can see that in the way these societies attempt to conquer others. They can easily pull off a genocide, enslave the people & write it gloriously in their history.

Then there's the new "secular" way of looking at life in the West - that life is just an accident. This view doesnt make matters any better either.

For Dharmic societies, there is a natural toning down of desires. You are responsible for the crimes you commit. There's no ever loving, ever merciful God who will forgive all your sins and give a free pass for eternity in Heaven. You have infinite shots at life. Without giving up your desires, there's no way of escaping. Its not in the Indian psyche to commit genocide, slavery, mass rape & write about it gloriously, the way Abrahamic societies do.

Dharmic Vs Abrahamic. A good classification. Naren you might need to expound it more, in an appropriate thread ( added later )

I'm planning to do that on Harmonization/Homogenization thread later.

naren · Post by **naren** » 14 Jun 2010 09:28

chanakyaa wrote:I've little difficulty understanding this concept. What is the meaning of "Civilizational-psyche" in the context of foreign affairs?

"Civilizational-psyche" is the collective attitude of a nation, which in turn defines its relationship, attitudes with other nations. "Civilizational-psyche" is long term. Foreign affairs is somewhat short term. This "civilizational psyche" leads to ideas such as "Islamic world", "western world" etc.

And, Which one of India's interests will be served by aligning with PRC? "Political", "Security Related", "Economy related", or is it just blind opposition to whatever "west" does? And may I ask, "how" does it serve these interests? And finally, what does "alignment" mean in practice?

It doesnt have to be blind, neither in opposing the west nor in aligning with China. I will elaborate more later in Harmonization/Homogenization thread.

Our problems are "political" and "temporal"? "Political", agree "in part", but "temporal"?

So we have been having problems with China for the past 2000 years ?

Can you explain, what is it that we are waiting for the CPC to "tone down" or "replace"?

Religious freedom. Giving Buddhism its due place.

For "pursuit of happiness" thingy, I don't know what to say, but I made a list of all modern inventions from penicillin, refrigerator, satellites and the Internet, which were direct result of the same "pursuit of happiness", and I couldn't find a single thing "Dharmic" people could be proud of inventing.....

Good flame baiting

ajit_tr · Post by **ajit_tr** » 14 Jun 2010 13:27

Is India Scared of China?
By Prakash Nanda
Issue: Vol 16.2 Apr-Jun 2001

Ms Annette Lu, the Vice President of the Republic of China, better known as Taiwan, is still finding it hard to believe that the Vajpayee government did not allow her to visit the earthquake victims in Gujarat with relief material worth more than one million US dollars because of the “Chinese fear”.
Ms Lu, who had earned international plaudits for her contribution towards rehabilitation of the victims of a severe earthquake in Taiwan in September 1999, wanted to come to India in her private capacity as the chairperson of a voluntary organisation called “Love and Care”. Her work among the earthquake victims, it is said, was responsible in a big way for her subsequent success as the Vice Presidential mate of President Chen Shui-bian six months later in Taiwan’s second but epoch-making presidential election (21 May 2000) that resulted in the peaceful transfer of political power for the first time ever in any Chinese society.

derkonig · Post by **derkonig** » 14 Jun 2010 14:09

^^^
Could it be the EJ angle that prompted Vajpayee govt. from not allowing her? Organizations named like Love, Care, Piss, Vision are truly suspect.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Jun 2010 02:53

X-post...

ShauryaT wrote:Shyam Saran: India needs to have sharper focus. New Delhi should support the move to expand the East Asia Summit to include the US and Russia. Shyam Saran. June 16, 2010, 0:43 IST

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 18 Jun 2010 05:22

These are the crazy things that the Chinese stoop to:

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/pri ... -guy/8119/

Will Indians one day be doing such things too?

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 19 Jun 2010 01:30

http://www.indianexpress.com/comments/n ... na/635436/

As Pakistan Army chief Ashfaq Pervez Kayani steps up pressure on the Chinese leadership to formalise a nuclear deal similar to the Indo-US civil nuclear initiative, the UPA government has cautioned Beijing about the negative fall-out of such a move on Sino-Indian relations.
Such a move, which could be announced this week during Gen Kayani’s visit to China or held back for a later date, is bound to set back the current efforts by Delhi and Beijing to normalise bilateral relations.
In the last few weeks, there has been a steady stream of reports that China is about to clinch a new deal to sell two nuclear power reactors to Pakistan in violation of the current rules of international nuclear commerce. While it deliberately chose to avoid a public spat with China on its proposed expansion of nuclear cooperation with Pakistan, Delhi has left Beijing in no doubt about its strong reservations that were conveyed through diplomatic channels in the last few days.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Jun 2010 03:47

In the first the first post Shyam Saran says non linear thinking is what accounts for a caterpillar to metamorphsise as a butterfly.

I found the correct mechanism is understood by the new science of proteomics- study of protein structures in genetics. Dr Nawin C. Mishra is a pioneer in this field.

While his book is about applications in biology I would like us to study such changes in other non biological fields. Eg how twitter has changed the social networking scene. Similarly we should study how the geopolitical weight of countries changes with small changes that have big and non linear impact.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 19 Jun 2010 05:24

They do it as in Tata hiring a firangi manager. But an expatriate would be betray his trailer origins quickly in India because of the language and extensive contacts/schooling/travel.

Chinese do seem to have a very deep sense of inferiority vis a vis whites. Sad.

naren · Post by **naren** » 19 Jun 2010 06:13

^^^

East Asians in general are very quick to give up their culture once they move to Massaland. You cannot see this among Indians, mostly.

The problem is, since the age of discovery, Europeanism/Science/Materialism is projected as the highest ideal everyone must aspire to & worship. (I think this is what Ramana ji meant by "normatizing")

India needs to get on top of the world, again. Materialism must be replaced with Sanathana Dharma - neither reckless enjoyments nor total ban on enjoyments, but responsible enjoyments. Indian philosophy - the system which harmonizes Science & Religion - must bring the extremities of Science and Faith together.

India is equally to be blamed. We have forgotten our responsibilities to the world. We need to wake up.

naren · Post by **naren** » 20 Jun 2010 03:57

^^^ nice post Prad ji. Agree with everything you said except "the breakdown in family is inevitable.". True in the US, but not everywhere and nobody need to aspire for it.

Rupesh · Post by **Rupesh** » 24 Jun 2010 01:57

Reacting to the reactors

Deng Xiaoping took a decision to proliferate to selected Marxist and Islamic countries in the early ‘80s including Pakistan, North Korea and Iran. Dr A.Q. Khan’s revelations have disclosed the entire saga of Chinese proliferation to Pakistan and the US looking away as a price for Islamabad’s support to the jihad against Soviet forces in Afghanistan. These disclosures stand vindicated as the Pakistani judiciary has exonerated Khan of all wrongdoing. It stands to reason that the Chinese proliferation to Pakistan and proliferation by both countries to Iran were deliberate state-led acts. All subsequent Pakistani proliferation attempts to Iran and Libya were state-sanctioned, and Khan was acting with full approval of successive governments and army chiefs in Pakistan. One of the mysteries about Khan not discussed in the Western media is his CIA link. Former Dutch Prime Minister Dr.Rudd Lubbers has revealed on more than one occasion, including at a conference in the Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses, that the Dutch authorities that detained Khan twice in 1975 and 1986 had to set him free on CIA’s intervention.

On June 7 this year, The Washington Post disclosed that a former CIA officer who managed intelligence reports on Saudi Arabia has sent an uncleared manuscript to Congressional offices claiming that China supplied nuclear missiles to the kingdom early in the George W. Bush administration.” I believe the People’s Republic of China delivered a turnkey nuclear ballistic missile system to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia over the course of several years beginning no later than December 2003,” writes Jonathan Scherck in a self-published book, Patriot Lost. It may be recalled that in the 1980s, even as China was proliferating muclear weapons to Pakistan, they sold CSS-2 long range missiles to Saudi Arabia. Since Saudi Arabia was financing the Pakistani nuclear programme it was a logical inference that when Saudi missiles needed warheads they would come from Pakistan. By the same logic the additional plutonium warheads under production in Pakistan are likely to find their vectors in Chinese-supplied missiles in Saudi Arabia. Shia Iran finds itself confronted on two sides by Sunni nuclear-armed powers. Iran has an experience of weapons of mass destruction (chemical weapon) by its Sunni leadership (Saddam Hussein). They face millennium-old Sunni hostility, al-Qaeda and its associates patronised by the Pakistan army regularly target Shias even while praying in mosques. Western analysts are right to worry about an arms race in West Asia. But the origins lie not in Iranian proliferation, but in Chinese-Pakistani proliferation. Iran is only trying to protect itself. The arms race is already on.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Jun 2010 03:40

We haven't really probed what the US, PRC and Indian interests are vis a vis each other even after more than two years of the meltdown.

Let us list US interests vis a vis PRC
US interests vis a vis India
PRC interests vis a vis US
PRC interests vis a vis India
Indian interests vis a vis US
Indian interests vis s vis PRC

And the clinchers:

US and PRC interests vis a vis India
India and PRC interests vis a vis US

Say two weeks to summarize long those lines.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 28 Jun 2010 11:01

Indian interests vis a vis US

Paramount on Indian expectations of US is to induce US support for non-stop economic growth in India. This is what MMS is after, leaving all other expectations (inc. national security) in the backburner. In some ways MMS's policy is akin to Deng Xiaoping's for modernizations for 20-30 year uninterrupted period with Defence at the backburner.

For the record, I am in MMs's camp as far as his priorities are concerned.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Jun 2010 11:07

Paul wrote: Indian interests vis a vis US

Paramount on Indian expectations of US is provide enough incentives for non-stop economic growth in India. This is what MMS is after, leaving all other expectations (inc. national security) in the backburner.

To make sure that US does not team up with PRC and go against India. This is the most primary interest above the economic interest.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 28 Jun 2010 11:09

exactly....however the credit for breaking the Sino-west consensus on isolating India within the subcontinent goes to ABV and his able lieutnant Sri. Jaswant Singh.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Jun 2010 11:23

Paul wrote:exactly....however the credit for breaking the Sino-west consensus on isolating India within the subcontinent goes to ABV and his able lieutnant Sri. Jaswant Singh.

Only one point. POKII made it happen

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Jun 2010 21:16

OK Paul and Acharya, Since others are not willing to state their views what in your view are the top five interests in each of the categories?

Let us list
1 US interests vis a vis PRC
2 US interests vis a vis India
3 PRC interests vis a vis US
4 PRC interests vis a vis India
5 Indian interests vis a vis US
6 Indian interests vis s vis PRC

And the clinchers:

7 US and PRC interests vis a vis India
8 India and PRC interests vis a vis US

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 28 Jun 2010 22:15

The PLA section of PRC establishment thinks the objectives of 20-30 year rebuilding period for 4 modernizations have been successfully achieved and it is time to move to the next phase. For this they would like west to cede control of western pacific oceans to PRC. This faction is most frustruated at breakdown of Sino-west consensus on boxing India (although they themselves initiated the chain of events through the EP3 incident).

However the other branch would like the current period to continue and wants to expand it's influence and secure PRC economic interests access to natural reosources through economic development.

This would be one of the national security objectives of PRC vis-a vis the west.

AFAIK India vs. PRC goes, I think PRC thinks it is still too early to take on India directly and would like to watch it's Pakistan proxy taking on this task. The sinking of SokO corvette through NoKo proxy shows that protection of PRC interests in NE Asia is higher priority for PRC than taking on India (for now).

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 28 Jun 2010 22:29

Key PRC objective vs. west is the same reason why Mao went to war in Korea. He did not want to see western armies on PRC's borders. Here PRC interests align with Russia as they both want west out of CA.

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 29 Jun 2010 00:09

ramana wrote:We haven't really probed what the US, PRC and Indian interests are vis a vis each other even after more than two years of the meltdown.

Perhaps a bit inappropriate for a family forum - but take it as humor

If you characterize the players like in an old Tamil or Telugu movie

US = Uncle (Zamindar)
China = Chinese Concubine (Chinna veedu)
India = Pathivrata Patni (Periya veedu)

1 US interests vis a vis PRC ->
Can't live without her, can't get her to do what I want
Cheap labor camp to satisfy needs, Market to exploit, keep her under control
and performing to my whims and fancy

2 US interests vis a vis India ->
Can't live with her, but cannot live without her
Not part of any solution, happy to keep her wanting and less problematic like my early days with her
Will visit her house once in a while - otherwise log kya kahenge?

3 PRC interests vis a vis US ->
Can't stand him, but can't live without him
Does not want conflict with Uncle, needs him to give her freedom to play in her shopping mall (broader Asia for now)

4 PRC interests vis a vis India ->
Can't stand her, can't acknowledge her existence
Wishes India were gone from the map, eventual goal is the breakup of India as it costs PRC nothing
but greatly benefits her. Can't stand the religious, ideological foolishness in India.
Supports evil sibling Pakistan to ensure India does not become the legitimate wife (Inherits from Uncle)

5 Indian interests vis a vis US ->
Accept me as your legitimate partner and lets ensure I can take on the mantle from you
Looks to the US as a older mate that needs to manage its decline by being deferential to India
Frustrated that she does not get what she needs from Uncle and he keeps going after his Chines Concubine

6 Indian interests vis s vis PRC ->
If only she understood that I understand Uncle's lust for her, then she would like me and treat me better
Confused by why PRC will not listen to good reason and live by moral and legal rules
Wants to accomodate the needs of Uncle and allow the Chinese Concubine her place
Blind to the fact that the Chinese concubine is very inimical to her interest

7 US and PRC interests vis a vis India ->
Why can't India leave us alone to our business of enjoying each other and can't she understand her true place
Pragmatically and Harmoniously: China will manage Asia for now
US will manage the rest of the world
As uncle grows weak, China will take over managing the entire world
India hopefully will not exist that long given its religious, ideological complications

8 India and PRC interests vis a vis US ->
He loves me he loves me not

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Jun 2010 00:17

Nice way of putting it. Now make it kosher.
You have captured most of the issues in your own way. Why do you think India is the legal wife and PRC not?

BTW, in a Track pee mtg, the PRC interlocutor used the similar terms but vice versa. He didn't want India to become one for the US.

So you have captured their mindset.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 29 Jun 2010 00:19

Two things PRC wanted from India.

1. India should never become a concubine of US and go against China
2. India should never demand the freedom of Tibet

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Jun 2010 00:23

So Tibet is a supreme interest of PRC.
And US-India compact is also another supreme interest of PRC.
What is PRC willing to do to further those interests?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Jun 2010 01:04

Ok Here is my version. We can add to it.

Let us list
1 US interests vis a vis PRC
a) PRC holds large currency reserves
b) Cheap Labor
c) Large bilateral trade
d) Ally against Cold War challengers
e) Useful for plausible deniability in arms proliferation

2 US interests vis a vis India
a) Huge Market
b) Source of educated manpower
c) Future economic power to be managed
d) Not take out Pakistan

3 PRC interests vis a vis US
a) Needs US market access for economic growth
b) Needs US accord political legitimacy to regime
c) Wants to be prime partner to US above all

4 PRC interests vis a vis India
a) Recognize Tibet as part of PRC
b) Not partner US in containing PRC continuation of colonial period
c) Not take out Pakistan
d) Not choke maritime trade thru the Sumatra gap

5 Indian interests vis a vis US
a) Not impede economic growth
b) Remove technology denial regime i.e. political legitimacy
c) Allow open labor access for software etc
d) Access to financial markets (ADRs etc)
e) Not ally with PRC against India

6 Indian interests vis a vis PRC
a) Not ally with US against India
b) Stop nuke transfers to Pakistan
c) Increase bilateral trade

And the clinchers:

7 US and PRC interests vis a vis India
a) Not take out Pakistan
b) Be satisfied with current status and not grow to challenge them

8 India and PRC interests vis a vis US
a) Stay confined to Europe and East Asia for stability
b) Have open markets for goods and labor

9 US interests vis a vis India and PRC
a) Not combine against US
b) Have open markets for US to exploit
c) Be subservient powers to US

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 29 Jun 2010 02:26

My take

1 US interests vis a vis PRC
- Economic exploitation bypassing human-right/environmental costs a.k.a cheap labor
- Asian satrap against future geopolitical competitors

Key Items
- Trade Balance & Cost of production (Pertnership)
- Taiwan (competitors)
- Japan (competitors)
- Korean Peninsula (competitors)
- North-East Russia (Partnership)
- India (Partnership)

2 US interests vis a vis India
- Crown Jewel (source of IP, Service-sector labor)thru strategic partnership
- Asian satrap against future geopolitical competitors

Key Items
- Knowledge Outsourcing (partnership)
- Defense trade (competitors uni-directional partnership)
- Pakistan (competitors)
- Subcontinent (competitors)
- PRC (partnership)
- EU (partnership)

3 PRC interests vis a vis US
- Complete hold on US consumption – source of assured trade balance
- Source of technology – thru IP theft
- One-stop power source to subdue and gain geopolitical prominence

4 PRC interests vis a vis India
- One-stop power source to subdue and gain complete Asian Dominance
- Potential consumption market
- Easy Target for influence due to weak leadership

5 Indian interests vis a vis US
- Source of international influence and access to power corridors
- Dual-use technology

6 Indian interests vis s vis PRC
- Potential partner in Asian alliance
- Positive Trade Balance (short-term)

Tried to put it in this structure... but couldn't complete in one go...

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 29 Jun 2010 03:43

^^^RamaY: Have to give it to you, for taking pains to organize your thoughts, in neatly understandable structures repeatedly. Thanks.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 29 Jun 2010 04:44

Thank you ShauryaT garu for the kind words...

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 29 Jun 2010 07:59

Summarizing my post above

Legend:
Green - Existing and potential partnerships
Blue - Existing/Potential bargain points
Red - Existing and potential flash-points/disagreements

How to read the table: Data is presented from the perspective of the player in Rows. Player names in columns indicate the partner. A cell denotes how the player in "Row" views the player in "Column".

For example,

PRC (in row) views India (in column) as partner in Trade. At the same-time it also sees winning India (thru sama-dana-bheda-dando paya) would pave the way for domination of Asia

PRC views India as potential threat/competitor w.r.t Tibet, Barma, and ASEAN region. India has same or more cultural/historical influence than PRC has on these regions.

Will try to put all my thoughts in this format for comments/feedback. I would like to add the following parameters to each item for future analysis - Time frame (in years), desirability-by player in row (1-100), Salience/Focus (0-100), Influence (0-100) and so on...

The next step would be to bring other stakeholders in the game... like Pawkis, Japan, Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, UKistan, KSA etc...

Then we will organize IPL on Geopolitics...

Let thousand thoughts bloom...

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 29 Jun 2010 08:08

^ Not sure if this was intentional, but notice we all do not have a US + India
I guess it is boring to be married a decent women!

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 29 Jun 2010 08:21

AWMTA (Remembering Rahul Mehta-ji) or we are a bunch of yindu-phundamentalists

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 29 Jun 2010 09:29

Look at India's internet penetration compared to everybody else:

http://www.technologyreview.com/communi ... 25567/?a=f

Looks pretty awful

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 29 Jun 2010 15:39

Look at the bright side, there's a lot more penetration to be done... and it will simply and incrementally contribute to overall stable economic growth in an organic faction.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 30 Jun 2010 12:36

India’s strategic advantage over China in Africa ---- Constantino Xavier
http://idsa.in/idsacomments/Indiasstrat ... ier_300610

This follows a series of papers on how the chinis are essentially fcked once they come up fighting in the IOR.
http://www.ipcs.org/article/india/india ... -3173.html

It has been said, ‘India is like boiling water, steam and froth on top but rather calm below’. ‘China is like boiling oil, calm above but violent and seething below.’ If an eruption does take place in one nation, it could be violent. The jury is out whether the Chinese top down approach will prevail over India’s rather slower and democratic bottom-up approach.

http://idsa.in/idsacomments/ChinasStrin ... man_080610

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 01 Jul 2010 01:01

Obama Whitehouse Considering Space Cooperation with China

Officials said they are talking with the Chinese government about including them in U.S. space efforts — such as the International Space Station — but there is nothing concrete yet.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Jul 2010 03:02

Acharya wrote:

India, China can collaborate in many areas: Swamy

30 Jun 2010, 1449 hrs IST,PTI, Economic Times

WASHINGTON: Observing that India and China share a very unique set of characteristics, former Union Law Minister Subramanian Swamy has said that the two Asian giants can collaborate in many areas, including IT sector.Â

"India and China can collaborate in various areas including IT, alternate fuel development, thorium based nuclear energy research etc. A collaborative attitude will be a winning game for both India and China," Swamy said in his keynote address to the Global Indian IT Professional Association (GITPRO).Â

Addressing Indian professionals at a function organised by GITPRO, at Cupertino in California, Swamy said, "India and China share a very unique set of characteristics, both of them are billion population countries."

In his speech on "Competing Or Collaborating Economies" Swamy said together the two countries were 50 per cent of world's GDP till about year 1750 AD, lost their position, and now growing at about 8.5 per cent growth rate.Â

They are regaining their positions and are only next to the US in the GDP, and US, China and India would form a triangle of leading economies in the next 50 years, he added.

"They (India and China) are the only large neighboring countries that have not been involved in any kind of conflict in the last known 2700 years except in 1962" he said.

"We in India need to evolve a policy to preserve the ancient relationship between both the countries without sacrificing their national interests," the Janata Party president said.

While infrastructure was China's key strength, India enjoyed advantage in skilled labour, he said.

"There are lot of areas in which both the economies can collaborate. Indian infrastructure and education systems needs improvement, and the only country which has a potential to match US innovation is India and the key ingredient for innovation is Democracy, this is where India has an edge over China."

"India's population would not only surpass the Chinese population but it would be younger and that would also be an advantage to India. While working on collaboration, India also has to compete with China in exports," he said.

http://economictime s.indiatimes. com/articleshow/ 6110291.cms? prtpage=1

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 02 Jul 2010 05:01

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 21886.html
GE Distances Itself From CEO's Reported Comments
By ANDREW DOWELL

General Electric Co. said Thursday that blunt language reportedly used by Chief Executive Jeffrey Immelt at a gathering in Rome to describe China and the Obama administration doesn't reflect the company's views.GE's disclaimer followed a report in the Financial Times, which quoted Mr. Immelt lashing out at China for making it hard for foreign multinationals to do business there and the Obama administration for its approach to regulation. "They do not represent our views," spokesman Gary Sheffer said of the reported comments. When asked by a reporter for the chance to speak with Mr. Immelt, GE said he was in transit. "I really worry about China," the FT reported Mr. Immelt as saying. "I am not sure that in the end they want any of us to win, or any of us to be successful." Turning to the administration of President Barack Obama, Mr. Immelt expressed concern that new regulation would hinder a "tepid" U.S. economic recovery and complained about a "terrible" national mood, according to the FT.

( Indians should convince industry Capitan like him to constanatly bat for India vis a vis China)

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 02 Jul 2010 05:06

Prem wrote:
( Indians should convince industry Capitan like him to constanatly bat for India vis a vis China)

I am trying to find buyers for GE wind turbines and blades. Want to help