Bharat Rakshak

NAIROBI (Xinhua) -- The Kenyan government has applauded the visit of the Chinese navy hospital ship Peace Ark.

Addressing the press conference in his office the deputy Provincial Commissioner (PC) Joseph Satia has said the exercise will enable people get access to medical treatment.

The ship set sail from Zhejiang province in east China on Aug. 31, for visits to Djibouti, Kenya, Tanzania, the Seychelles and Bangladesh, and providing medical treatment for locals.

Peace Ark is the first hospital ship in the world with a 10,000- ton capacity.

China independently developed and built it.

It has 428 soldiers, officers and medical workers aboard.

The ship will arrive at Kenya’s coast on October 13.

The Chinese ambassador to Kenya, as well as representatives from the Kenyan Navy are expected to meet the ship and her crew.

Lalmohan wrote:ironic isn't it... only 60 years ago, japan had set off on an aquisition spree called the greater asian economic co-prosperity sphere, and now china is doing the same?

RajeshA wrote:X-Posting from India - The Indian Ocean Civilization & IOR Thread

China is expanding its soft-power outreach to IOR countries.

Therefore, Chinese bullying tactics against any African nations would be even tougher than what Asian nations and Norway have recently experienced. Therefore, African nations do not dare to protest any Chinese decree.

One might ask what is worst when it comes to securing African independence. Africa's traditional underdog relations with the West, or Africa's new chequebook-or-sanctions relations with bullying China?

The only sure thing is that, as dependency deepens, it will be ever more difficult for African governments to open their mouth on China or to get relations balanced. This is of course in line with Beijing neo-colonial tactics.

United States as a Threat: Differing Perceptions of China and Russia

Ten years down the line while a number of short-term convergences exist between China and Russia pertaining to Central Asia but it appears that China and Russia do not share the same long –term perceptions of the United States threat, which was the prime consideration that stimulated the formation of the SCO.

China all along has considered the United States as its prime strategic threat despite any peace rhetoric that flowed between Beijing and Washington all these years. In the last decade China accuses the United States of thwarting its strategic rise as a great power if not a superpower. The Chinese Grand Strategy in the last ten years to defeat its perceived US-Threat has been to gear up the speedy build-up and modernization of its Armed Forces and its Strategic Forces, promote strategic nuisance value of rogue states like North Korea and Pakistan by equipping them with nuclear arsenals and create counter pressure-points against the United States in the Islamic World.

As the year 2010 is heading towards a close China seems to be locked in a strategic confrontation and military brinkmanship bordering on the extreme with the United States in East Asia. The sequence of events in2010 most vividly illustrate that China has not strategically restrained itself in creating potential flashpoints with the United States. It seems somehow that China is on a collision course with the United States.

When it comes to Russia the strategic setting in relation to the United States differs vastly from that of China. Russia in 2010 cannot be said to be on a collision course with the United States. The United States may be a strategic concern for Russia but realistically it cannot be said that the United States is a military threat to Russia.

The United Sates is presently engaged in ‘resetting” relations with Russia and reorient the Cold War mindsets on Russia. There is hope that United States would realize that it would be better to craft a bipolar global power structure by co-opting Russia as a partner to manage China’s strategic rise and what it entails in China’s propensity for conflict to resolve conflictual issues.

Consequently, the differing perceptions of the United States as a threat between China and Russia are likely to arrest the growth of SCO as a potent security organization for countervailing the United States.

China and Russia: The Mutual Strategic Misgivings

Notwithstanding the rhetoric that flows between Beijing and Moscow on the institutional viability and strengths of the SCO, what cannot be swept under the carpet are the mutual strategic misgivings that abound between China and Russia. These are over and above the divergent perceptions on the US-threat and center on the respective strategic interests of China and Russia in Central Asia.

China and Russia can both be said to have strategic misgivings about each other and have competing strategic interests in Central Asia. The Central Asian Republics even after breaking away from the former Soviet Union enjoy close and interdependent political, economic and military cooperation linkages with Russia. What needs to be recorded here is the fact that the Central Asian Republics unlike the others did not wish the Soviet Union to disintegrate.

Other than the commonality of SCO membership these Central Asian Republics are also members of Moscow-centric security organizations like the CIS and the CSTO. Their natural tilt therefore is towards Russia than China.

Russia therefore views the Central Asian strategic space as its ‘area of natural influence and interest’. It views with suspicion Chinese efforts to muscle-in in this region on the strength of its economic strengths and energy security considerations. Russia has even been successful in limiting and regaining military influence in this region in the face of United States moves in the region especially after its military intervention in Afghanistan in 2001.

In terms of strategic focus, Russia looks more towards Europe whereas China focuses on the Asia Pacific and East Asia more specifically. Nothing epitomizes this more than Russia’s differing approaches than those of China to North Korea and Japan

Lastly while on this subject it needs to be stressed that Russia too is fearful of China’s increasing strategic assertiveness in its trajectory to grab superpower status. Here the Russian and United States strategic interests enjoy convergence. Russia fears that China has the potential to marginalize Russia and arrive at compromises independent of SCO linkages to grab superpower status.

Sudip wrote:The chinatowns number 31 countries while the little indias number 18 :-(

RajeshA wrote: It just means Indians are not prone to ghettoization. Indians are willing to interact with the locals and live amongst them, to integrate with the society. It could just as well mean, that Chinese want to hide themselves!

TonyMontana wrote:

RajeshA wrote: It just means Indians are not prone to ghettoization. Indians are willing to interact with the locals and live amongst them, to integrate with the society. It could just as well mean, that Chinese want to hide themselves!

I love it. Always the most negative intepretation. Let me guess, you don't like Chinese food neither right?

India is watching with concern the recent attempt by China to treat Kashmir as a tripartite issue, marking a change in its long-stated position of viewing it as a bilateral matter between India and Pakistan. China's approach on Kashmir, especially issuance of stapled-visas for Kashmiris, is a concern as it is viewed here as an attempt by Beijing to question India's sovereignty.

"But when they started issuing stapled visas...that is when we found there was a shift in their stance and we pointed out to them that they were also in illegal occupation of a territory occupied by Pakistan," the sources said, alluding to Aksai Chin area of PoK which has been ceded by Pakistan to China.

"And China is continuing issue of stapled visas. We will keep talking to China on this," they said. {So they are doing this, even after India has shown its strong disapproval and sent them a demarche.}

What seems to be coming out is China is now now virtually questioning India's sovereignty against the earlier practice of treating Kashmir as a bilateral dispute between India and Pakistan.

New Delhi feels that China and Pakistan appeared to be entering into a strategic calculus in the Karakoram area where the People's Liberation Army (PLA) troops are present for highway construction. {So much 'feeling' and 'appearing'! How about 'knowing' and 'stating it as a matter of fact'}

Indian officials feel that Pakistan seems to have ceded responsibility, if not sovereignty, to China and this has implications for India's boundary dispute with Beijing.

However, officials said it was important not not to indulge in "doomsday conclusions" because the relationship with China is matured and evolved in many areas. {matured indeed. PRC doesn't give rat's ass about a core issue for India, and we talk about mature. If we don't act, it would become a mature relationship like between a bully and his victim. Or is the 'evolved relationship in many areas' supposed to be GoI's excuse for not acting on this issue!}

On the boundary question, India and China were still to evolve a convergence that could lead to an agreement but there has been tranquillity on the borders for more than two decades save for some incursions. {Don't tell me! All the incursions were by Chinese into the Indian side}

India sees "some mutation" within China on issues like the role of PLA, one-party authoritarianism and its role in the neighbourhood. {Again this is the good cop, bad cop routine we know from Pakistan. How many decades do we have to suffer this?}

While there are challenges, sources note that India is also growing in stature as far as its role in the neighbourhood is concerned with its economy being the anchor for the region. {I'm sorry - China challenges us to a fight, and we go home and put on economic lipstick!!!}

India prefers low-profile investments in neighbouring countries with long term objectives while China focuses on high-profile investments for short term benefits. {What is short-term about gas pipelines and highways and ports. Makes the whole article sound like crap}

The future engagement between India and China will tend to be engaging than confrontational, officials said. {We have run out of white flags. Please make more}

TonyMontana wrote: I love it. Always the most negative intepretation. Let me guess, you don't like Chinese food neither right?

In a calibrated assertion against China’s increasing military assertiveness, India will strengthen its cooperation with countries in the extended neighbourhood, especially in the ASEAN (Association for Southeast Asian Nations) region, without escalating tensions, said highly placed government sources.

India is getting closer to countries such as Japan, South Korea and Vietnam, which have tense relations with China. However, Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao said India aims that "the engagement quotient in the ties (with China) should go up and the confrontation quotient should come down."

In Washington, India’s ambassador to the United States, Meera Shankar was far more direct. "We are somewhat concerned over — and it’s not directed towards India — increasing Chinese assertiveness in terms of Chinese behaviour vis-à-vis many issues on which it may have difference with its neighbouring countries,” she said.

Answering questions after her talk on Indo-US relations at the George Washington University, Shankar also added that there were concerns about ‘capacities’ the Chinese were building. “There are concerns about transparency, intentions and the purposes for which these capacities are being built,” she said.

India is keenly watching the unraveling power play in China, in which the army is becoming more assertive.

"Much depends on the internal calculus in China. The role of People’s Liberation Army (PLA), the Chinese army is becoming more muscular, more assertive,” a senior government source said.

As a counter, India is seeking to strengthen the cooperation with its neighbours—both extended as well as immediate (for instance, Indonesia, a key ASEAN member) — with huge resources and strong cultural synergies. Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhyono will be the chief guest at next year’s Republic Day parade in Delhi. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will be going to Malaysia this month and later to Vietnam for the East Asia summit and Japan for a bilateral summit.

India on Wednesday announced a slew of measures to expand its defence ties with Vietnam, including joint training of armies and support to strengthen and upgrade the capabilities of the Vietnamese armed forces. Defence Minister AK Antony, who is in Hanoi, met Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung and his Vietnamese counterpart General Phung Quang Thanh.

China is actively engaged in Sri Lanka, Nepal, Pakistan and Myanmar, fostering economic ties and pumping investments, to India’s discomfort.

China’s recent actions on Kashmir have caused heartburn in Delhi. Though China has officially maintained that Kashmir should be resolved through a dialogue between India and Pakistan, its recent moves have virtually endorsed Pakistan’s claim on Kashmir.

The issue of stapled visa to the residents of Jammu & Kashmir as well as Beijing aiding projects in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir are reflective of such a “mutated stance”, these sources said.

These issues have resulted in India putting on hold all defence exchanges barring the border personnel meeting. The immediate provocation for that was Northern Army commander Let Gen B S Jaswal, whose jurisdiction includes Kashmir, not getting a visa to travel to China.

In a significant gesture, Vietnam has offered repair and maintenance facilities for Indian warships at its ports, taking bilateral military relations up several notches. After a meeting with Defence Minister A K Antony in Hanoi, his counterpart Gen Phung Quang Thanh welcomed more port calls by the Indian Navy and offered maintenance and repair facilities for warships at Vietnam ports.

This would extend a major advantage to the Indian Navy that has been scaling up operations in the region, specially in the South China Sea where several patrols have been carried out in the past few years. Vietnam is strategically located in the region and has several sea ports, including Hai Phong, located near China’s Hainan island, that could be of great interest to India.

Hai Phong is possibly the nearest port made available for the Indian Navy to the Hainan island where the biggest Chinese naval base in the region is located. China has constructed a major naval base that includes an underground facility that can hide the movement of submarines from spy satellites.

The military facility, the nearest Chinese naval base to India, is located barely 1,200 nautical miles from the strategic Mallaca strait and provides access to the Indian Ocean — a region that New Delhi considers its personal security responsibility. In 2008, China deployed its new Jin-class nuclear submarine, which is armed with 12 nuclear tipped missiles, to Hainan.

Vietnam’s offer came even as Antony announced that India would host a joint jungle and mountain warfare exercise with the country next year and New Delhi would help upgrade capabilities of the Vietnamese armed forces.

After meeting with the top Vietnamese leadership including Gen Phung Quang Thanh, Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung and the President Nguyen Minh Triet in Hanoi on Wednesday, Antony announced that India would help enhance the capabilities of the Vietnamese forces in general and would focus on the Navy in particular.

It may be recalled that India is already supplying spare parts for the Petya-class of light frigates that are operated by the Vietnamese Navy. India has already decommissioned 11 of the Russian origin warships. After Wednesday’s meeting, the Indian Navy will increase its involvement to other types of warships, possibly including maintenance of the new Kilo-class submarines that Vietnam has ordered from Russia.

Speaking after the meeting, Antony said that “New Delhi will provide support to Vietnam to enhance and upgrade capabilities of its Services in general and the Navy in particular” and emphasised that India will help Vietnam in its “capacity building for repair and maintenance of its platforms”.

Besides, the “joint training in mountain and jungle warfare in India next year”, the India Army will also impart IT and English Training to Vietnamese Armymen. “The two sides will work towards developing cooperation among defence institutes and establishing links for sharing experience and knowledge,” Antony said.

The war on terror (by the way: misnomer; the war against radical Islam) [is] absolutely dangerous, absolutely lethal. The possibility for dirty bombs, nuclear attacks, all of those things have real consequences. But I would offer to you that the only existential threat to the United States today is in the form of China.

Right now, the Chinese have a lead in very deep-sea submersible technologies …We’ve seen the Chinese planting a flag at the bottom of the ocean. The same naval pundits that say, “Well, they don’t have platform parity with us” [in other words, Chinese ships aren't as good as American ones] also have to acknowledge the fact that we don’t have platform parity with them.

We are very much in a race. We cannot ever allow China to lead us in any form of exploration or any form of exploitation of natural resource simply because we cannot be 100 percent confident that our best interests are being looked after.

We’ve identified a trillion dollars in mineral resources in Afghanistan after we’ve spent thousands of Americans lives and hundreds of billions of dollars to secure that. Why would we ever allow that to be exploited by someone else? We need a public-private partnership with the Afghan people to make sure, to the extent there are fruits to be garnered from our military efforts, we need to make sure that we’re in a position to receive them. So there are certainly some ways that we could be funding these activities.

One of the reasons the United States and its NATO allies are losing ground to China in the global geopolitical race is the belief in the permanence of tradition and precedent in world affairs—this in an age when paradigm shifts are taking place at an accelerating pace, and when even core realities can change beyond recognition within a decade.

There’s no better example of this trend than the People’s Republic of China itself, which has morphed several times since its founding in 1949. Indeed, to understand present-day China better, and to adjust policy accordingly, some Western analysts might need to set aside the fundamental preconceptions they’ve picked up from studying China’s evolution. Because the fact is, many of them are no longer valid

India and Mauritius have resumed discussions over a proposal to hand over the twin islands of Agalega in the Indian Ocean to India either on long-lease or by perpetual ceding of control. The Mauritius-held islands with a total area of 24 sq km or 2,400 hectares (the official figure is much higher at 70 sq km) is seen as ideal for development as a tourist destination by India, which is closer to it than the African country which is 1,100 km south of it.

The land could also be used for agriculture and other strategic purposes by India.

it will mark a move towards the country having a footprint on another Indian Ocean island

Sources added that given the nature of Mauritian politics, it could still be an uphill task before a formal handover. The island nation's politics is built around balancing the interests of various ethnic communities such as the Francophone Creoles and the Indo-Mauritians. Creoles have a serious objection to the deal.

anupmisra wrote:Mauritius could hand over 2 islands to India

Sources added that given the nature of Mauritian politics, it could still be an uphill task before a formal handover. The island nation's politics is built around balancing the interests of various ethnic communities such as the Francophone Creoles and the Indo-Mauritians. Creoles have a serious objection to the deal.

We have been hearing reports of Vietnam wanting Prithvi Missile, Brahmos Missile and Indian Navy eying Cam Ran Bay port facilities. We then waited for all this to fructify as Chinese were supplying arms and other support to Pakistanis. But, it did not happen. Again, analyst told us that India did not want to antagonize china. India even did not develop its on areas bordering China. Vietnam was a far away land. Until 2 years back, India was in chorus with South East Asia propagating enough room for China. The quadrilateral exercise that India attended once fell apart. Australia, Japan, India and US were not quadrilateral any more.

Then Chinese cracked the whip. All the collective pretensions of “accommodate China” slogan went up in smoke. Suddenly China was in Kashmir, Spratly Islands and diplomatic offensive. China asked US for this side of the Pacific in joke, that did not go down well with the particular side that Chinese asked for. It also said that Indian Ocean is not “India’s Ocean.”

In last few days, the India defence minister AK Antony was in Hanoi for First ASEAN Plus Eight Defence Ministers’ Meeting. He did not just go and read out a written text. We heard a slew of military to military co-operation efforts with Vietnam.

Vietnamese Gen Phung Quang Thanh, while expecting more Port Calls by the Indian naval ships, has offered maintenance and repair facilities for Indian naval ships in Vietnam Ports. It can serve both Indian and Vietnamese naval ships as both use Russian equipment.

Indian Army offered Mountain and Jungle Warfare Exercises. But, I sincerely hope, Indian Army will learn from Vietnamese how to build those enormous underground tunnels networks.

Of course, the offer of help in Information technology systems and English language to Vietnamese forces is commendable.

Even if India has been late in engaging Vietnam in military sphere, India should enable Vietnam with weapon systems for protecting itself from a larger adversary. This is not just the need of the hour, but also a historic responsibility for and of India in South east Asia.

anupmisra wrote: Francophone Creoles

At least 29 candidates in House and Senate races across the country have aired ads suggesting their opponents have been too sympathetic to China, the New York Times reported last Saturday. Unlike many issues that have candidates taking sides along party or ideological lines, this year's races find Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives blaming their opponents for the loss of jobs and economic power to China. While the issue might seem better suited for challengers running against incumbents who have a record of supporting trade deals or tax policies said to encourage the export of jobs, some incumbents running against free trade advocates have turned the issue against their challengers. In Ohio, for instance, congressman Zack Space, a Democrat, hopes to make political hay of the fact that his Republican opponent is a self described free trader — or as a Zack Space ad describes him, he is "free-trading, job-killing Bob Gibbs."
"Bob Gibbs is a proud free trader," the narrator says in the ad that twice shows Gibbs at a lectern saying, "I'm a free trader." The ad claims Ohio has lost 91,000 jobs to China "through unfair trade deals like NAFTA" and that Gibbs wants more trade with China "to increase their standard of living." The ad uses the Chinese dragon for visual effect and addresses the Republican foe with the Chinese word for thank you.

"As they say in China, xie xie, Mr. Gibbs!"

Japan will consider relaxing its long-standing ban on weapons exports as the country explores ways to bolster its military capabilities, Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara said in an interview Thursday.

The move reflects concern among some Japanese leaders that Japan is falling behind in security and weapons technology, even amid potential threats from China and North Korea.

But signs are growing that Maehara and other officials might be seeking a more muscular approach to defense, even as Tokyo tightens its alliance with the United States. Maehara emphasized that reconsideration of the weapons export ban is not connected to a recent spat with China over disputed islands in the East China Sea. The newly appointed foreign minister mentioned, instead, Japan's desire to participate in multi-nation technology projects - something it cannot do under its "three principles" policy, which ban arms exports.

There is also the matter of differences regarding Iran. Japan withdrew from an oil-drilling project in Iran this month, bowing to U.S. pressure to impose sanctions over Tehran's nuclear development program. Since Japan's Inpex Corp. backed away from the Azadegan oil field project, however, China National Offshore Oil Co. has worked to fill the void.

"That portion that Japan gave up was taken up by China," Maehara said.

Japan's ban on weapons exports dates to 1967, when then-Prime Minister Eisaku Sato established the three principles, prohibiting arms deals with communist bloc countries, countries subject to embargo under U.N. resolutions and countries involved in international conflicts. Nine years later, those three principles were tightened into a near-absolute ban on weapons exports - though exceptions are made for one-on-one dealings with the United States.

At a meeting in Hanoi this week, Japanese Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa expressed his desire for a major overhaul of the three principles. The perfect opportunity, he said, will come at the end of the year, when Japan reviews its national defense posture.

"We should not just sit and watch domestic defense production bases and technological platforms deteriorate in a situation in which we are bound hand and foot," Kitazawa told reporters, according to the Mainichi Daily News.

But Kan said Tuesday that he does not want to revise the three principles.

The civilian leadership of India’s defence ministry gets rather nervous when the armed services mention such terms as “expeditionary forces”, “multinational military exercises”, and “inter-operability”.

The Chinese defence establishment, in contrast, is focused precisely on these concepts, which Beijing believes are central to the projection of its power across the Eurasian land mass and its adjacent waters.

Defence Minister A. K. Antony has all but ruled out serious multilateral military diplomacy after the CPM objected to the four-nation naval exercises in the Bay of Bengal three years ago. While our communists might be hostile to defence diplomacy that boosts India’s military power, the Chinese communists are busy honing the skills of their armed forces in collaboration with others. In the “Peace Mission 2010” joint exercises conducted last month, the People’s Liberation Army or PLA used the multilateral framework of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation to sharpen its ability to use force beyond its borders. More than 5,000 troops of the SCO joined the 16-day drill at the Matybulak mountain range in Kazakhstan.

Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy today said India needs a sophisticated foreign policy combined with modern weaponry to counter China in defence preparedness.

"We need to modernise our weapons. A new mindset of countering China in the defence preparedness is required, combined with sophisticated foreign policy," he said in a panel discussion on 'India's Strategic Perspectives in 21st century' at the College of Defence Management here.

Speaking in the Session-I of the panel discussion on the topic 'Indian and Chinese National Aspirations: Conflicts and Concerns', the former Union Minister said, "We have no clear-cut China policy and have a mindset problem about that nation."

"The defence budget of India is around 2.2 to 2.3 per cent of the GDP while China has a defence budget of 6 per cent of its GDP. Its (China) military hardware is far superior in network, quantity and quality than India's, and as its recent dispute with Japan shows it already has a super power mindset which we do not have," Swamy said.

Swamy also underscored the need for identifying China's vulnerabilities.

"We need to understand China's vulnerabilities and prepare for the same," he said.

Participating in the discussion, Security and Intelligence expert Jayadeva Ranade said the Pakistan-China "nexus" has intensified in the past 2-3 years besides China making deliberate moves on the Kashmir dispute.

"Chinese are involved in lot of infrastructure and construction activities in PoK and even their high-level officials are visiting this region. China, which wants to emerge as an alternate power, is also helping Pakistan on nuclear technology and may also win Pakistan away from the United States," Ranade said.

Vice Admiral (Retd), SCS Bangara said India lacked a decision making structure and emphasised on the need for professional decision making agencies with scope for accountability.

Another panelist and senior journalist Indrani Bagchi said China has a clear strategic approach while India's plans are never clearly defined.

Later, speaking to reporters, Swamy predicted that China, which is the second largest economy, may face a major financial crisis in the next 3-4 years.

"There will be a banking and financial crisis in China in the next 3-4 years," he said.

Reacting to a query on India not taking an official stand on awarding of the 2010 Nobel Peace prize to Liu Xiaobo, a jailed Chinese dissident, Swamy said, "There was no need for official government reaction on that. They (Nobel Committee) have failed to give Nobel Peace prize to Mahatma Gandhi and Jayaprakash Narayan, till now who had immensely contributed towards peace in the country."

RajeshA wrote:

Sudip wrote:The chinatowns number 31 countries while the little indias number 18 :-(

It just means Indians are not prone to ghettoization. Indians are willing to interact with the locals and live amongst them, to integrate with the society. It could just as well mean, that Chinese want to hide themselves!

TonyMontana wrote:

RajeshA wrote: It just means Indians are not prone to ghettoization. Indians are willing to interact with the locals and live amongst them, to integrate with the society. It could just as well mean, that Chinese want to hide themselves!

I love it. Always the most negative intepretation. Let me guess, you don't like Chinese food neither right?

But it isn't often that China's own leaders are censored these days--which is exactly what happened to Premier Wen Jiabao last week.

On Oct. 3, Premier Wen granted an extensive interview to CNN's Fareed Zakaria. During the dialogue (well-worth the half-hour), Wen raised eyebrows by arguing that the Chinese people's "wishes for and needs for democracy and freedom are irresistible." Wen promised that, in pursuing these wishes, "I will not fall in spite of a strong wind and harsh rain, and I will not yield till the last day of my life."

Wen's comments were covered widely in the Western press. But in China, such coverage was stifled in the days following his remarks. On Oct. 7, the Wall Street Journal reported that there had been "an official news blackout" of the interview.

Another popular theory is that there is an elite power struggle going on in Beijing, and that Premier Wen is personally working to drive political reform in the face of mighty opposition as he approaches the end of his term in 2012. By this line of thinking, Wen's opponents would have stifled his comments so that the Chinese public wouldn't expect any rapid changes. "Fire's real beauty," as Ray Bradbury wrote in Fahrenheit 451, "is that it destroys responsibility and consequences."

Perhaps. But it seems more plausible that the immediate stifling and subsequent careful management of Wen's comments simply reflect the transitory political environment in China right now. Keep in mind that Beijing is moving toward an unprecedented leadership transition in 2012. Seven of the top nine members of the Chinese Communist Party will be replaced along with hundreds of lower level Party and government officials.

We assume that the top leadership beyond 2012 has been generally agreed on (with some exceptions). But there's no question that most officials have strong incentives to avoid controversy in the lead-up to this transition. Any black mark could undermine their chances to get top spots in the next administration, and any perceived weakness could be exploited by rival factions for their own gain. Meanwhile, it will be getting gradually more difficult for the current leadership to mobilize support as different groups in the Party, government, and military coalesce behind their preferred candidates for the top spots in 2012.

Cities
1. Hong Kong, Hong Kong {what happened to Han-Han-bhai-bhai, hain ji ? }
2. Singapore, Singapore
3. Washington, DC, USA
4. Beijing, China
5. Delhi, India {darn, those meddling kids }
6. Shanghai, China
7. Brisbane, Australia
8. Sydney, Australia
9. Melbourne, Australia
10. Toronto, Canada

ramana wrote:Instead of what Nalpat writes here India should let PRC take over the Central Asian landmass.

Its the constant tussle in Asia that lets Europe dominate world affairs since Darius times. Even later the Ottomons and Safavids (in 16th century) exhausted themselves in mutual fights leading the West to rise.

• Russia - At the moment their strategic partnership is holding. China has shown it can intrude into Russian backyard economically in a big way - through Oil & Gas pipelines and Russia cannot do much about it. Secondly Russia has mutated into an oligarchy, which is happy with selling Oil & Gas and other minerals & raw materials to China, and to some extent defense equipment also. They get to make a fat profit and the Russian State can use the money to prop up its image as an equal of USA. Moreover the Chinese have influence in the Russian establishment. So it seems if Chinese increase their sway in Central Asia, it would not be contested in any big way by Russia. It also depends on Russian-American entente.
• India - India is boxed in in the Indian Subcontinent. Through various strategies of using proxies like Pakistan, having an intimidating missile arsenal in Tibet pointed at India, gaining influence in the Indian political class, moving in in a big way in Myanmar, Nepal, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, China seems to have constrained India's strategic freedom in the Central Asian landmass. Also India has no land access to Central Asia at the moment.
• USA - USA presence in Central Asia makes USA only weaker, not stronger. China can wait for USA to leave the region out of its own volition. The hunch is the Afghan Taliban are being supported by Pakistan but Chinese have their hand in the game and are behind this policy of bleeding USA a 100%. It is questionable how long USA can stay.
• Ummah - The Chinese have several bonds with the Islamic World.
  1. Pakistan - The Chinese influence over Potohar is immense. Han-Pakjabi Alliance is perhaps China's strongest cards. With this alliance, China has been able to come closer to USA, China has been able to neutralize its biggest challenge in Asia - India, China has also used Pakistani good offices to curry favor with other Muslim countries like Maldives, Bangladesh, Turkey, etc.. An alliance with Pakjab has meant that China need not fear the Islamists to trouble China in Xinjiang. Pakistan is China's trump card, and long after America has dumped Pakistan, China would continue to stand by it.
  2. Anti-Americanism - The wide-spread Anti-Americanism in the Muslim world has meant that the Muslims, who find themselves at the receiving end of American power, have welcomed the rise of China whole-heartedly. Islam has always feared the ideological threat arising from the Occident, and with the relative weakening of Europe & America, the Islamists can hope for more freedom in pushing through their agenda. In fact the Muslims see the Chinese as friends-in-arms as far as America is concerned.
  3. Similarity - The Chinese do not indulge themselves in moral grand-standing. They pose no ideological challenge to Islam. Since the retreat of Maoism-Communism in China, the challenge has faded away. In fact many of their methods are similar. So the Muslims feel comfortable dealing with the Chinese. The Chinese have no Human-Rights agenda and hence all form of dictators in the Islamic World have also no inhibitions dealing with the Chinese.
  4. Supplier-Consumer Relationship - The Muslim countries have virtually zero scientific research & development. I will go so far as to say, they don't have the aptitude for science. So the Muslim countries are happy to trade their Oil & Gas with the Chinese with no questions asked. The Central Asian dictators, Sudan, Iran, etc all have plenty of Oil & Gas and in China they have a market with enough money to spend.

Gus wrote:

anupmisra wrote: Francophone Creoles

Is Creole a generic name given by French to natives? There are Creoles in Louisiana too IIRC.

He said, "Even though we have a stable border with China, we cannot take chances". He told the seminar organised by Centre for Land Warfare Studies (CLAWS), an Army-sponsored think tank, that an all-out conventional war with China was "not certain", but skirmishes were "certainly possible." "We must have a substantial conventional war-fighting capabilities with the ability to fight in a nuclear scenario,"he stressed.

Listing the future threats to India's national security, Singh said the island territories were vulnerable and these needed to be defended well.He also talked about the coastal assets, both military and infrastructural, that were critical for the country's development and said securing them too was of primary importance.
In this regard, he noted that India's peninsular projection into the Indian Ocean had provided a gateway for attacks and the country's subjugation in the past.

Altair wrote:The only meaningful way to deal with chinese bully is to be a bully. Show some brinkmanship and they might backdown.There is no smooth way to deal with this situation.

1. Psychological Warfare: Every country is different and has different national issues. Each country represents a different challenge to India. We need to analyze their psyches and test psychological challenges on these countries. We talk a lot of carrots and sticks. The problem is we don't know when to give those carrots and sticks and we don't know what sort and size of carrot and stick is the right fit. Every psychological weakness of the other MUST be used. China needs to be dealt with in a certain way, Pakistan in another, Nepal in another, and Sri Lanka and Bangladesh in yet another way. Bullying is simply psychological warfare. Why do we look down upon it? We should be meeker with the meek, and a 10 times more aggressive and ruthless with the bullies of the world!
2. Expand our Strategy Vocabulary: Till now we use words like 'concern', 'observing', 'talks', 'diplomacy', 'investment'. So we observe and we express our concerns to those un-concerned! What happens then? We procure some more military hardware! This is a very very constrained strategy vocabulary. What I mean by this is that Policy can not just be about observing and talking. We need tons and tons of strategic cards, proxies, influence, preemptive policies, etc. We need to play the game. We are not doing that. We need a finger in every hole in the world - whether it is honey jar at the other end or just sheet. And it all needs to be interwoven with our national interests.
3. Offence is the best defense: When we negotiate with any party - it should be the other party's core interest which we hold in our hands against concessions - we should bargain using other's people's land, freedom, respect, sovereignty, economy, moral standing. Why are we defensive on issues from Kashmir, to anti-Christian disturbances in India, to our dealings with our neighbors, to water issues, to our strategic defense? We should be doing the attacking on Baluchistan, Tibet, Western Imperialistic History, Dictatorships, etc. We should be bribing dictators, and politicians and strong-men the world over and turning them against our enemies. We should have a special budget for corrupting the world, because that is the only way to make the world go round.

The forays of Chinese aerospace weaponeers into better and more—many more—ballistic missiles, fighter jets, instruments of electronic warfare, and, potentially, near space-based sensor architecture, all generously funded with the deep pockets of the Chinese Communist Party, should alarm security experts and may redefine political and military dynamics in the Asia-Pacific region, according to a U.S. think tank.

In reports published this year and last year and in recent speeches, researchers from the Project 2049 Institute in Washington have painted a detailed and discomfiting picture of the CCP’s modernization of its military forces in aerospace—meaning those that roam both air and space.

Aerospace power is emerging as a key instrument of Chinese statecraft. Informed by universal air campaign theory and spurred by a global diffusion of technology, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is developing capabilities that could alter the strategic landscape well beyond the Asia-Pacific region. Aerospace power is unquestionably defining the future strategic environment in a region whose vast distances place a premium on speed and agility that defy the laws of gravity.

In this theater, aerospace power is the key to gaining strategic advantages by the application of military force via platforms operating in, or passing through, air and space. Control of the skies is a critical enabler for dominance over the earth’s surface and is often a vital determinant of success or defeat in a conflict. Gaining and maintaining air superiority provides a political and military leadership with the operational freedom needed to coerce an opponent to make concessions in political disputes or gain a decisive edge on the surface.

Almost since the birth of Pakistan, its government has been battling a low-level insurgency in the southwest region of Baluchistan.

The region accounts for nearly half of Pakistan's territory. Its strategic position and natural resources are attracting the involvement of foreign powers, which are making the insurgency worse.

"To me, the 19th-century 'Great Game' has started in this region again," he observes, "but in different forms and with different players."

The most conspicuous player in Baluchistan right now is China. A government-owned firm is mining gold and copper at Saindak. But Baluchistan National Party Secretary-General Jehanzeb Baluch says the Baluch have been shut out of the profits.

"Every nation has a right to pursue its interest," he concedes. "But the means should be fair. They should make sure that their interests do not collide with the local people's interest."

Baluch nationalists say the Chinese employ few Baluchis in the mines, and the precious metals are taken back to China to be refined.

"Baluchis feel helpless that they are being sandwiched in all these powers and this great game," Jehanzeb Baluch continues. "The Chinese are interested in getting to the Straits of Hormuz, the energy corridor. The main gate of this corridor is Gwadar, Baluchistan."

The Chinese have helped build and run the port of Gwadar, which is located on the Arabian Sea, just 180 nautical miles from the entrance to the Persian Gulf.

A Counterweight To India

China's aim is to bring Middle Eastern oil into Gwadar, through Pakistan and into the adjoining Chinese territory of Xinjiang. This could be done by trucking the oil up the Karakorum highway, which connects the two countries, or by a yet-to-be-constructed rail link. This would bypass India and a strategic choke point at the Straits of Malacca.

University of Karachi international relations expert Farhan Siddiqui explains that China's strategy is to "establish good ties with Pakistan so that Pakistan can be used as a counterweight against India, in the same sense that the Americans are using, or utilizing, India as a counterweight to China."

RajeshA wrote:

Altair wrote:The only meaningful way to deal with chinese bully is to be a bully. Show some brinkmanship and they might backdown.There is no smooth way to deal with this situation.

Exactly, the only thing stopping us is our psychology. We are our own worst enemies.

A few things India has not done, which any power should do are:
Why are we defensive on issues from Kashmir, to anti-Christian disturbances in India, to our dealings with our neighbors, to water issues, to our strategic defense? We should be doing the attacking on Baluchistan, Tibet, Western Imperialistic History, Dictatorships, etc. We should be bribing dictators, and politicians and strong-men the world over and turning them against our enemies. We should have a special budget for corrupting the world, because that is the only way to make the world go round.[/list]

China-US-Southeast Asia: (Long item alert!)
In an interview with the Zhongguo Xinwen She, Senior Colonel Wang Xinjun, research fellow from the Department of War Theory and Strategic Research under the Academy of Military Science, presented an update presentation of China's self-image and how it wants to be seen: as the equal of the US in major fields of international activity.

Wang wrote that while observing the negative side of China-US relations, one should also be aware of the positive factors that would give impetus to the development of China-US military ties. For example, China and the United States had common interests in a number of major fields, including the international anti-terror campaign, proliferation prevention of weapons of mass destruction, and international peace-keeping efforts; and bilateral ties of cooperation are of critical importance to maintaining peace and stability in the region and the world at large.

"In the face of subtle changes in the current and future international order because of China's rapid development, the United States is currently redefining China's role and its relations with China, and China-US relations are expected to enter a relatively difficult 'period of adjustment' and 'period of adaption' in days to come," Wang Xinjun said.

Wang told the interviewer, "Being the two most important countries in the world (emphasis added),both China and the United States have the responsibility and obligation to avoid drastic ups and downs or direct confrontation in bilateral relations, and should make an effort to facilitate a stable and healthy development in bilateral relations. During the current difficult period in China-US relations, the strategic circles of both sides in particular should exercise extreme caution."
Wang then cited principles of bilateral cooperation, reproduced below:

"Firstly, the two countries should respect each other's concerns….The two countries should act cautiously in their handling of each other's core interests and other sensitive issues."

"Secondly, the two countries should step up high-level exchanges and dialogues, with a view to enhancing understanding and minimizing misunderstanding and misjudgment. Facing China's rapid growth, some politicians in the United States are calling for containing China's rise by force. This shows that it is necessary for both sides to step up contacts, enhance understanding, and expand consensus."

"Third, in the course of promoting bilateral relations, both sides should gradually abandon the old alliance ties that are directed against a third party (emphasis added). It is an outdated tradition in international politics to form strategic alliances against a third party, and such a tradition is not in keeping with the realistic trend of global international politics. Defining China as a rival will do no good to peace and development in the region or the world at large."

"Fourth, the two sides should act in line with the principle of facilitating a mutually beneficial and win-win development, and strive to expand cooperation on an equal footing in fields of common interests. China and the United States are currently facing, and will continue to face in the future, many common challenges; and will only be able to cope with these challenges through sincere cooperation with each other."

"Fifth, the two sides should abandon the practice of threatening each other with the use of force on the slightest provocation. In contemporary times, it is an extremely stupid idea, and an expression of poor wisdom and strategic capability, to suggest that problems between China and the United States should be resolved by force."

Wang Xinjun concluded, "The contemporary environment of international politics, security, economy, and science and technology has provided a broad platform for peaceful competition between China and the United States. The real big competition between Chinese and American politics and between the two peoples is to demonstrate wisdom, creativity, magnanimity, and perseverance when facing difficulties and conflicts."

Comment: The news journal is an official government publication. Its primary audience apparently is overseas Chinese. The fact of a commentary on the Chinese-US exchanges at the Hanoi defense ministers' meeting attests to their importance. The commentary updates how China's leaders see their country and want others to perceive it as well.

Two points stand out from the interview. First is the writer and those he represents expect turbulence to continue in what he calls a complex" relationship. In communist cant, "complex" always means unpredictable and prone to stress that could become violent.

Second is the presentation of China as an equal competitor with the US in five areas: international politics, security, economics, science and technology. The commentary also posits that China is the partner of the US in fields off common interest.

It is not clear when this characterization of China began, but it is a departure from earlier descriptions of China as a "rising power" and not a threat to anyone. This overall characterization is so incongruent with reality as to suggest ethno-centric cheerleading. But it is the new look of China for the worldwide Chinese audience.

The message is that China is the US equal, but not a rival. That would seem to mark the end of the "rising power" language. Of course, Japan, Russia and other states might have a different point of view.

Note: NightWatch recognizes that it is misleading to write about China as if there were one viewpoint in a leadership structure as complex as that in Beijing. Nevertheless, the Chinese have mechanisms for summarizing and communicating consensus national policy. This publication is one of those.