US and PRC relationship & India

[Prem]

It will be interesting to watch how much influence Penatgon has over US foreign policy initiative/s. There is already a movement in security circles where Americans are asked to take oath in the name of loyalty to Constitution or Republic and not to Commander In Chief. Obama factor is polarising the society.

[csharma]

Even CNN types are talking about how little US achieved in the trip. The saving grace is that the White House officials are saying that it is important to engage with these nations. What a low bar for success.

[Mort Walker]

India has to be slighted. As stated in the India-US thread, US-China trade is over $450 billion and US-India trade is $45 billion. Ombaba and his tax cheater finance minister Timothy Geitner have concluded that any US economic recovery is dependent on China buying US treasury notes so that the federal government can provide cheap finance. Much of the US economic turn around is based on housing real estate in which the US Federal Housing Administration (FHA) is providing the funds for some 75% of all home loans.

Now where oh where are all the Ombaba apologists in this thread? They seemed to have ducked their tails between their legs or are busy down hill skiing after declaring victory.

[Jarita]

Now where oh where are all the Ombaba apologists in this thread? They seemed to have ducked their tails between their legs or are busy down hill skiing after declaring victory.

Obama is just the front man for the Soros, Brez and co crew behind him. We can blame him all we like but this is a continuation of the Halfbright school of thought

[rgsrini]

I think it is going to be a careful balancing act from all players concerned trying to maximize their returns. However, if things go south and India's interests are compromised significantly, India has a couple of other cards as well (besides Weapons and Nuclear plants)
1. India can turn the heat up on Pakistan, which will effectively screw the Af-Pak policy
2. India can engage with Iran more openly and proceed with the oil deals/IPI etc

If US is openly hostile to India like they used to, it would be easier for India to play these cards. It an ingenius exhibition of realpolitik from the US. It is keeping India close which confuses our politicians/policy makers and prevents us from playing the cards that affects the US. Indian policy makers are shown the shiny light called "strategic partnership with US" which keeps them in a constant state of hope, and forces them to disregard the obvious and no-so-obvious undermining of Indian interests. The major ones I could think of are (forcing us to downgrade our relationship with Iran, unnecessary conditions in Nuke deal, Preventing us from attacking Pak after 26/11 and now projecting China to be superior to India and rehyphenating India-Pak etc, protecting the name of TSP army guy linked to Headley).

There are too many doubts creeping into this relationship atleast from India's perspective. Oneway to address this is to establish a continuous channel of communication with the US in the lines of Jaswant-Talbott where all concerns are discussed openly and honestly. I am not sure if it already exists.

Coming back to the US-China joint statement, In reality, it doesn't matter to us. It is all in our minds. Even when the US was openly hostile to India and sided with Pakistan and closely aligned with China, they could do Jack-shit to India's Kashmir policy. The worst case scenario is that we are back to square one. But India is far stronger now both economically and militarily.

Added later: It will certainly restrict India's political space and may even affect our economic growth. But that will be only for the next couple of decades. After that India will be far too big and far too attractive and far too powerful for all these things to matter. But US would have missed a historic opportunity to be at the right side of India for once.

[Masaru]

Coming back to the US-China joint statement, In reality, it doesn't matter to us. It is all in our minds. Even when the US was openly hostile to India and sided with Pakistan and closely aligned with China, they could do Jack-shit to India's Kashmir policy. The worst case scenario is that we are back to square one. But India is far stronger now both economically and militarily.

Strength in absolute terms is meaningless. IMHO relative to PRC India's strength has declined since the 1970-80 period. If India had maintained balance of power both economically and militarily w.r.t I doubt that the tribute paying that is going on would be happening.

This relative weakening is the cause of concern, more so as they have no moral compunction in giving whatever 'help' needed to prop up their taller than mountain deeper than ocean allies. While with US help to TSP was monetary and conventional arms, when push comes to shove rest assured that the PRC support will be much more active and vigorous.

[rgsrini]

IMHO relative to PRC India's strength has declined since the 1970-80 period.

I am not sure I agree with this though. Economically, I can see that we may have relatively declined economically and even that is questionable considering all the "cooking" that goes on in the Chinese books. Militarily, I do believe we are better off (compared to the 1970-80 period). We have the Missile reach and variety now, the MKIs, the AWACS, the sattelites, the bums, the delivery options including from the submarine etc. IMO we have made it impossible for China to take any offensive action against us in our borders. India has also somehow managed to get access to both near cutting-edge Western and Russian technology which is denied to China. AWACS and MKI are perfect example of this.

However, the Chinese have better influence than us both in our immediate neighbourhood and far away. They are very smart about it and India is playing catch up here (thanks to PVNR for kick starting the look east policy, openly recognizing Israel etc).

All in all I rate it as a tie between India and China since the 70s. In the coming years the chinese options against India will continue to dwindle as we continue to grow and also cultivate partners in the region and beyond.

[Masaru]

IMHO relative to PRC India's strength has declined since the 1970-80 period.

I am not sure I agree with this though. Economically, I can see that we may have relatively declined economically and even that is questionable considering all the "cooking" that goes on in the Chinese books. Militarily, I do believe we are better off (compared to the 1970-80 period). We have the Missile reach and variety now, the MKIs, the AWACS, the sattelites, the bums, the delivery options including from the submarine etc. IMO we have made it impossible for China to take any offensive action against us in our borders. India has also somehow managed to get access to both near cutting-edge Western and Russian technology which is denied to China. AWACS and MKI are perfect example of this.

Well since the time I have been tracking the data (~5 years) PRC econ has grown from roughly 2.5 times the size of India's to roughly 4 times the size now. One can have cognitive dissonance about this by alluding to cooked books but the Forex reserves military (~10x) spending (~ 3-5x) and trade volumes (>10x) and the physical infrastructure on the ground are pointers to the growing gap.

Well they are fielding their own F-16 equivalent and selling it in 100s to their taller than mountain friends and you want to be happy in having access to Russian / US weapons? This is the gap both in thinking as well as capabilities that speaks to the relative strengths of either country. End of the day the strength of the country stems from the economy, more specifically the infrastructure and industrial base; and in either count India is far behind and the gap is growing by the day.

[D Roy]

it is relative, but in a different way. there is something called critical mass. and India has already crossed that threshold.

you are not talking about a country of 25 million here but of 1 billion blus. here quantity has its own quality.
when we talk about power asymmetry we seem to only think in terms of the absolute "official" economy. we forget that population size is equally important. This is also one of the reasons why the americans talk about china as an "equal" despite having an economy three times as big with a quarter of the population.

Also, if my enemy is spending 100 billion on defense , it does not mean that I have to spend anywhere near the same amount to deter the enemy. In terms of both conventional and nuke warfare only a certain critical amount of expenditure capability is required to acquire certain systems and enable their deployment.

anything over that is just incremental or as in the case of the US - wasteful. the US expenditure is primarily a function of the numerous unnecessary bells and l whistles that both their weapons and troops seem to require, as well as the fact that the US defense industry is a huge percentage of overall manufacturing in that country. Not to mention that in every which way the cost of doing things in dollar terms is greater in the U.S.

In my opinion, getting panicky is not an option.

[ramana]

If we go back to page one of this thread and re-read Shyam Saran's speech and see where we are today.

It is my firm belief that even while we learn to cope with the more immediate impact of the on-going financial and economic crisis, we should look more closely at the manner in which the crisis may be changing, in a fundamental manner, the global geo-political landscape as well as the dominant ideologies which were accepted wisdom in most parts of our world.

Let us first look at the nature of the financial and economic crisis itself. It is a crisis that originated in the US and has now spread over the entire global economy. The Western dominance of the global financial markets and the global economy as a whole has been shaken to the core. It is possible that New York and London may no longer regain their undisputed status as the central financial markets of the world. With this has come an intellectual crisis engendering an open questioning of the western espousal of the magic of the market place, the belief in self-regulating market mechanisms and the relentless retreat of the state from virtually all key areas of economic life. These twin crises are beginning to spawn significant and far-reaching political consequences. One relates to the redistribution of political power based on real economic strength. The other relates to perceptions, which are equally important, shaking confidence in market based liberalism that has been the dominant dogma for the past two centuries and more.

causing

U.S. is embarking on an equally unprecedented diplomatic offensive to co-opt China in its economic recovery strategy...There are increasing calls for a Sino-US global condominium, a so-called G-2, which would shape a new world order.

leading to

China has not revealed its hand so far. It has certainly encouraged thinking in the U.S. and the West that it is the key to their economic recovery. This provides it with a significant leverage for achieving its foreign policy objectives even though on the ground it may be able or willing to do much less.

How does all this effect India?

What are the implications for India?

For India, this is not necessarily a negative. It creates for us, other things being equal, greater strategic space. We will have more room for manoeuvre in managing our relations with a more diverse set of powers, and do so with more flexibility.

It should be our objective to encourage the trend towards a more diffused and diversified international order. This fits in well with our own instinctive preference for a multi-polar world, which includes a multi-polar Asia. We will need to work with other powers who share this objective. Our effort should be to build coalitions on different issues of shared concern and not primarily rely on a more limited range of strategic relationships.

This will imply a more energetic pursuit of our relations with countries like Russia and middle powers like Brazil, South Africa and Mexico. The European Union and, in particular, some of its individual members like France, can be useful political and economic partners.

And as we see this has been pursued in the last few months.


Meanwhile

China itself is hedging its bets by pursuing a number of parallel bilateral and regional strategies. For example, while consulting closely with the US, it has also worked together with Japan and South Korea to create a North-East Asian swap arrangement and promised to consider a regional economic recovery package. China is also interested in adding substance to BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) and put security issues also on its agenda. It is promoting both the Shanghai Cooperation process as well as a closer and more comprehensive relationship with South East Asia.

Unstated is the support to NoKo and TSP.

What else can India do?

India’s approach should be to position itself innovatively in a manner that enables it not only to ride-over this crisis with relatively less adverse impact but more importantly, to ensure a position of advantage for itself as a new international and geo-political landscape begins to emerge.

Our political prospects will inevitably be determined not only by how we weather the current storm, but whether we have strategies that enable us to emerge from the crisis as among the foremost of the economies of the world, and as one of the key drivers of the global economy. We will need to go beyond the defensive and survival-first strategies which currently dominate our thinking. Instead, we need to carefully assess what our strengths and vulnerabilities are as a continental-sized emerging economy, and articulate a forward-looking economic game plan on that basis.

So what are the economic weaknesses?

At least for some time to come, the impact of the global crisis could well lead to diminished markets overseas and the revival of protectionist tendencies in those markets. There may be, similarly, diminished prospects for attracting inward investment from major capital-exporting countries. In short, the global economic environment may not be as supportive of India’s growth prospects as it has been during the past decade and a half.

So we need our own stimulus to help tide the crisis. This is what Pranab Mukherjee was talking about.

and

Secondly, all major economies will end up being more regulated than before. There will be more State intervention, initially by default and eventually by choice. There is a real possibility that a new economic orthodoxy will emerge where the state will, once again, become not only a regulator but a major economic actor. The tendency in countries like India would be to uncritically slip into a similar mode of thinking. Our statist legacy makes us particularly susceptible in this regard. We must guard against this.

The new disinvestment program underway is part of this guarding.

What else?

For example, we should use the opportunity created by the crisis to consolidate pro-actively our economic interaction with our neighbours including through unilateral and asymmetric steps, if necessary.

The SAARC process is still there. SL FTA is underway. More can be done.

and

We could use the opportunity of depressed commodity and other prices to acquire productive assets abroad while they are cheap, buying energy and raw-material sources, for instance, and making strategic investments abroad. The political obverse of this would be a strong outreach in Africa and West Asia and other developing countries, revitalising our developing country constituency through targeted initiatives

Don't know the progress in this area but a lot of visitors are coming to India.

and

The Indian IT industry is likely to be significantly impacted due to loss of overseas markets as well as protectionist trends. So far the IT industry has been focused on the export market. It has not looked at the domestic market as a significant business opportunity. Now could be the time to do this. More competitive conditions in both domestic as well as external markets require Indian industry to be more efficient and productive. This is where our IT industry can play a significant role, but this will require the dynamic sectors of the economy, the service sector and the manufacturing sector, to come together to deliver a major punch, once the global economy settles down into a new and altered landscape. There should be a willingness in business and industry to think through and come up with an ambitious and potentially winning strategy. They should seek government support for delivering on such a strategy rather than looking only for short-term relief.

I haven't seen much here except for Nandan's UID scheme which could keep the IT folks occupied. Satyam has been reconstituted.

and

There is a window of opportunity for government and business to take advantage of these favourable conditions, to accelerate the upgradation of our transport networks, build more state of the art airports and seaports, build ten instead of only one high speed rail freight corridors, extend mass public transportation networks to all major towns and cities, and most of all, solve the power problem once for all. The civil nuclear agreement is a timely instrument in our hands today. As investment in the nuclear renaissance in the developed world slows down, India could some source many more high capacity nuclear reactors on the most competitive terms, if it wishes to. The country can leverage its financial credibility in the global market, to raise the funds required. We have to package and project ourselves as part of the solution to the global economic recession and not as its tragic victim. As a sound, credit-worthy and growing economy, with relatively less exposure to the buffeting of the global crisis, we are still a good bet, a low-risk and potentially high-return economy. But we will need to communicate these strengths more effectively to the rest of the world than we have so far.

We see this happening with the Kodankulam and other projects. We see both Australia and Canada visiting India back to back.

and

The inter-related crisis of climate change and energy security has already triggered a wave of innovations in renewable energy, such as solar energy, bio-mass and wind energy.

The Copenhagen initiative participation to prevent adverse impact is there. Here is one area for cooperation with US.

and

We will need to restructure our economy to play on our strengths such as in IT and reduce our vulnerabilities, for example, in infrastructure. There should be a strategy to take long-term advantage of the depressed global market conditions both for capital equipment and strategic commodities, including nuclear energy. This is an opportunity for acquiring strategic economic assets abroad as well as critical technologies on more favourable terms.

- Finally, we should use the challenge of climate change to fundamentally shift the Indian economy from its reliance on depleting fossil fuels, to a significant use of renewable energy. This will promote India’s energy security and spur technological innovation and change, positioning India as a front-ranking power once the current crisis begins to recede.

Here comes the need to get waivers on technology transfers. Lets see how it plays out in the meeting with US.

Finally,

“Linear analysis will get you a much-changed caterpillar but it won’t get you a butterfly. For that you need a leap of imagination”. I am certain that imagination is one resource that is never in short supply in this country.

Well to metamorphose the caterpillar has to work hard. It spins its cocoon and almost dies of exhaustion and goes into sleep. When it wakes it breaks out of the cocoon and gets transformed into a butterfly. So the moral is we need to work hard and not just wish it be so that India becomes a butterfly.

Thanks for the plan.

[rgsrini]

Well since the time I have been tracking the data (~5 years) PRC econ has grown from roughly 2.5 times the size of India's to roughly 4 times the size now. One can have cognitive dissonance about this by alluding ...

Well they are fielding their own F-16 equivalent and selling it in 100s to their taller than mountain friends and you want to be happy in having access to Russian / US weapons? This is the gap both in thinking as well as capabilities that speaks to the relative strengths of either country.

Are you angry or something? or are you trying to belittle me somehow? Okay suit yourself, because it doesn't affect me.

Economically, I do agree that we have relatively declined (mentioned in the original post as well). However, I would take the numbers that are coming out of China with a pinch of salt.

Regarding Weapons supply to Pak, they have always supplied to Pak, including the bum (this even when they are not an economic power). The US was supplying as well and is still doing it. The only difference is that the US didn't care a hoot about India earlier. Now they appear to make statements to calm us before supplying it anyway. Nothing new here.

Given all that, IMO India is less vulnerable to chinese threats now compared to 70s and 80s. I have stated a lot of other stuff in my post that we have acquired/developed since the 80s which is the basis for my opinion. I also believe that this gap will continue to reduce drastically in the next 2 decades. If you don't agree and see it differently, that is your prerogative.

[D Roy]

To boost infrastructure GOI needs money . and some of that money can come from PSU selloffs transferred to an infrastructure fund .

[Masaru]

Are you angry or something? or are you trying to belittle me somehow? Okay suit yourself, because it doesn't affect me.

Not at all the intention; and if it does come across that way then accept the apologies.

Great summary Ramana Sir!　Hope somebody follows up on the excellent strategies, which is where most of the problems arise.

[James B]

Obama irritates India, envoy applies the balm

"India and the US will continue to work shoulder-to-shoulder, hand-in-hand and hour-by- hour to co-operate on combating terrorism," Roemer said.

Ambassador Roemer seems to be inspired by adjectives used to describe Paki-Cheeni relationship

[Masaru]

India-Pakistan ties: China not seeking a primary role

A Foreign Ministry official said on Thursday China would only “support” relevant moves to improve peace and stability in South Asia, and indicated the country did not see seek to play a primary role in improving relations between India and Pakistan.

“As long as it is good for peace and stability in the region, and improvement of stability in the region, China supports relevant moves,” Mr. Qin said. “We believe India and Pakistan are important countries in South Asia{There you go, the goal of equal equal is achieved!}. China highly values its friendly cooperation with the two countries and hopes the relationship between the two countries can be gradually improved.”

In the 4,224-word joint statement the two countries issued after the meeting, the one paragraph that referenced South Asia — and generated much attention in India — was 77 words long.{Wow, new way to quantify how important a statement is by counting the number of words it takes to express it? }

[KaranR]

http://news.uk.msn.com/world/articles.a ... =150964485

pa.press.net, Updated: 19/11/2009 18:05
US warns of rampant Chinese spying
A US congressional advisory panel has said that Chinese spies are aggressively stealing American secrets to use in building up Beijing's military and economic strength.


"China is the most aggressive country conducting espionage against the US," the report said.

The report said China is the origin for much of the sharply rising malicious computer attacks against the US in 2009.

[RoyG]

^^What's new? lol

[shynee]

China holds, mistreats US geologist

[ramana]

In line with what I posted in Af-Pak thread that US might be sending a message to TSP that its not alone when it included India in the joint statement,

Nigthwatch fulminates:
18 Nov 2009

India: Following a joint U.S.-Chinese statement calling for the improvement of Indian-Pakistani relations, India's Foreign Ministry released a statement 18 November, saying that the Indian government did not need a "third country" to help in its relations with Pakistan, Reuters reported. The statement said that the Indian government "is committed to resolving all outstanding issues with Pakistan through a peaceful bilateral dialogue."

There will be no world condominium agreement that India will respect. The Chinese motives in endorsing such an agreement with the US are fairly obvious. The US invests the Chinese with stature they do not have and can never obtain on their own in South Asia.

The more perplexing question is why and on who’s advice a US President would do such a thing, after working for several years to win the confidence of the Indians. If the two greatest and largest democracies in the world do not stick together, what would induce a US President to treat the Chinese communists as allies against India or to agree to language that could be so misconstrued?

If members of the President’s staff drafted or agreed to that language, a whole bunch of so-called Asian experts on the President’s staff out to resign for incompetence and bad judgment in advising the President.

What would be the point in gratuitously offending the world’s largest democracy which has shown as much restraint in dealing with Pakistan as the US has, perhaps more.

On 26 November next week, Indians will commemorate the anniversary of the Mumbai bombings and attacks. India chose not to go to war with Pakistan, though the evidence of official Pakistani support for the terrorists is overwhelming. Even Pakistani President Zardari admitted the attack originated from Pakistan. The Indians would seem to require no tutelage from the US or China in how to handle Pakistan.

I think its the bunch of Af-Pak goons led by Holbrooke. They were sending message to TSp at Indian expense.

[Mort Walker]

Now where oh where are all the Ombaba apologists in this thread? They seemed to have ducked their tails between their legs or are busy down hill skiing after declaring victory.

Obama is just the front man for the Soros, Brez and co crew behind him. We can blame him all we like but this is a continuation of the Halfbright school of thought

Jarita,

This was always there, but the last administration started to erode this policy, it wasn't all gone, but it is surprising that it is being brought back with such a rigorous revival by Ombaba.

[Jarita]

Jarita,

This was always there, but the last administration started to erode this policy, it wasn't all gone, but it is surprising that it is being brought back with such a rigorous revival by Ombaba.

It looks like that on the surface but unless GW diverged from senior too much, it should not be the case. After all Bush senior was in the kissinger- nixon camp. Also recall the George Bush senior is the ambassador Kissinger keeps ref to. Seniors china policy is the policy you see right now. GW might have aligned with India because they needed our help in Afpak. However, given the economic situation, he might have swung back to China. GW is also a big supporter of the Joshua project in India.
Not sure if USs international policies would differ with diff govts.

[RoyG]

Hurriyat chief Mirwaiz Umar Farooq to visit China

CNN-IBN

Fri, Nov 20, 2009

New Delhi: India may have rejected United States of America President Barack Obama's offer to China to be the supercop in India-Pakistan matters but sources say Hurriyat Chairman Mirwaiz Umar Farooq is going to China to give them his perspective on Kashmir.

"Yes, I will visit China soon. I have been invited by a Chinese NGO to talk about Muslim issues. It is basically a Muslim NGO," Farooq has been quoted as saying by The Indian Express.

Farooq is likely to meet diplomats and administrators in Beijing during his visit later in 2009.

If the visit goes through, it would be the first time that any separatist leader from the Valley has gone to China.

Earlier Farooq had called for a joint contact group on Kashmir between India, China, and Pakistan.

China's invitation to Mirwaiz comes when relations between China and India are strained following Beijing's criticism of the Dalai Lama's visit to Tawang..

Moreover, the recent US-China statement on India-Pakistan relations prompted India to say that there was no third-party role in bilateral relations with Pakistan.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/hurriyat-chi ... ml?from=tn

[Jarita]

More

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/mirwa ... na/544071/

He said he had been invited by the Han Foundation, a Chinese “NGO” to talk about “Muslim” issues. “It is basically a Muslim NGO,” Mirwaiz said.




Mirwaiz needs to propagate his religion in China. That will take care of PRC. Let's throw the pitbull pups over the fence

[krishnan]

Interesting he gets an invite after obama visit to china. or he got it even before that?

[RoyG]

I highly doubt he's going to China just to link up with a NGO. Proly a cloak for more "sensitive" arrangements?

[Aditya_V]

And why is GOI allowing this visit?? can we send him ona one way ticket, if any of his followers or media prtotest they should also be free to do so?

Unless a condition be made before he leaves that he will talk CHinese murder of Muslims in Xingjiang on CCTV.

[ramana]

Link:
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20091120/edit.htm#3

China isn’t easily won over by Obama
by Barbara Demick

WHEN it came to China, U.S. President Barack Obama's famous powers of persuasion failed to persuade.

Although he came bearing a long shopping list that included Chinese support for tougher sanctions on Iran and more flexibility on currency exchange rates, Obama was met with polite, but stony, silences.

Not only did the president come away without any definable concessions, but the Chinese appeared to be digging in their heels.

Tuesday, just hours after Obama stood side by side with President Hu Jintao in the Great Hall of the People, praising China's commitments to "move toward a more market-oriented exchange rate over time," a senior Chinese official called a news conference across town to issue a rebuttal.

"We maintained a stable yuan during the financial crisis, which not only helped the global economy but also the stability of the world's financial markets," said deputy foreign minister He Yafei, adding that it was too soon to talk about a change of strategy.

The Chinese official also slapped down Obama's call for more Internet freedom, saying that "we need to ensure that online communications do not affect our national security."

Perhaps most disappointing was China's failure to budge in its opposition to tougher sanctions on Iran. With China's extensive oil interests influencing its policies toward Tehran, the country increasingly is seen as an obstacle to reining in Iran's nuclear ambitions. Obama had hoped China would at least fall in step with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, who publicly criticized Iran's intransigence during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit over the weekend in Singapore.

"I would not say that we got an answer today from the Chinese, nor did we expect one," said Jeffrey Bader, director of East Asia Affairs on the National Security Council, briefing U.S. journalists after the meeting between the presidents Tuesday. He conceded that the Chinese were less worried about Iran's nuclear program than North Korea's.

During the news conference at the Great Hall of the People, where the presidents each read statements outlining the highlights of the meetings as they perceived them, Hu conspicuously omitted mention of sanctions against Iran, acknowledging only that there were differences on some issues.

After the ritual handshake and posing for photographs, the leaders left the podium – refusing to answer questions from the media.

It was in keeping with the character of a presidential visit notable for its formality and lack of spontaneity. Every aspect of Obama's visit was carefully scripted, with the Chinese government taking pains to make sure nothing was left to chance. Obama did not meet with Chinese journalists, lawyers, human-rights advocates, environmentalists or any ordinary Chinese, and an expected meeting with Hu Shuli, who recently resigned as editor of China's leading business magazine, did not materialize.

During Obama's "town hall" meeting in Shanghai on Monday, the 50 students selected to attend were mostly officers of the Communist Youth League. Wary that Obama might say something provocative, the Chinese government refused White House requests that the event be broadcast live on nationwide television. Instead, it was broadcast only on Shanghai television.

Coverage of Obama's visit was also subdued, with noticeably fewer stories in the Chinese newspapers and shorter television reports than during other presidential visits.

Obama's limited results in part reflect the profound shift in U.S.-Sino relations and global politics.

"It used to be the U.S. could go around and say, `Do this and do that,' because they had so much leverage," said Dali Yang, director of the Center for East Asian Studies at the University of Chicago. "Today, the U.S. can't do that."

Ding Xinghao, president of the Shanghai Institute of American Studies, said Obama did not seem to connect with the Chinese as well as former President Bill Clinton had. He recalled a 1998 nationally televised question-and-answer session that Clinton held with students at Beijing University. "That was an amazing event. ... Clinton looked the students in the eye and answered very hard questions," Ding said. "Obama's performance in Shanghai was significant, but for me it couldn't compare."

Then again, Ding noted, the novelty of a U.S. presidential visit has worn off.

It was difficult to find anybody in Beijing who would express any real enthusiasm for Obama's visit. Even at a shop selling Obama souvenirs, the reaction was ho-hum.

"Obama coming here doesn't have anything to do with us. He's the president of the United States. We're Chinese," said Yang Xiuying, a clerk at a Beijing crafts store selling dolls of Obama dressed as Superman.

— By arrangement with LA Times-Washington Post

If the trip is being assessed as a failure by LATimes/Washington Post then why was the joint statement referring to India? Looks like it was crafted before the trip on advise of the Af-Pak cowboys and allowed without changes. I mean if US didnt get much why did they concede such an important chess piece to the PRC?

[Raman]

Hurriyat chief Mirwaiz Umar Farooq to visit China

Actually, I think India played this one rather well!

Delhi turns tables on Beijing over Mirwaiz trip to China

New Delhi on Friday turned the tables on Beijing by stating that Mirwaiz was free to go to China, provided he got a visa recognised as valid by the Indian government.

New Delhi had recently stated that it would not accept as valid the “stapled paper visas” issued by the Chinese embassy and consulates in India exclusively to the people of Jammu and Kashmir and Arunachal Pradesh.
...
And, if the Chinese government issues a regular visa to Mirwaiz, it will tantamount to backtracking by Beijing from its earlier decision not to treat the people of J&K on a par with Indian citizens from other states.

[nithish]

^^^ very good

what goes round...

[putnanja]

Couldn't mirwaiz go to TSP and from there to China using the stapled visa? India won't be able to prevent it then

[Prem]

It will be illegal if he does so and Haramiwaiz can put in jail for 10 years along side few 'spinsters' from Chambal.
Good news is now it will an overt tussle. let Dalai Lama declare Tibet's accession to Indian Union and ask for plebicite .

[AnimeshP]

Next Step:
Expect a trip from Mirwaiz to Pakistan when a senior chinese dignitary is there .... and a joint statement from Muzzafarabad ...

Looks like this (India-China sparring) is going to be a long game of chess !!

[Hari Seldon]

Looks like this (India-China sparring) is going to be a long game of chess !!

Chalo, thats some progress at least. We will now be sparring with the devil itself (PRC) and not its pawns (spawns?) like TSP.

[Atri]

Looks like this (India-China sparring) is going to be a long game of chess !!

Chalo, thats some progress at least. We will now be sparring with the devil itself (PRC) and not its pawns (spawns?) like TSP.

but Hari ji,

the dragon wouldn't have been elephant's enemy if partition wouldn't have happened... If partition is undone, dragon will no longer remain elephant's enemy.. that has been the history of 3 millennia..

[Dhiman]

This kind of sums up the recent events quite nicely:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KK21Df03.html

As for Mirwaiz travelling to China, that is certainly an issue, although in Chinese eyes only Best of luck to Mirwaiz travels in China and I hope that besides Kashmir he also discusses Xinjiang issues with China and then tables a full report regarding Uyghur civil rights along with a passionate speech in front of Hurriyat conference which will no doubt be picked up by local Kashmiri press and be plastered all over the internet. What better way for Uyghur's to get more publicity.

Offcourse the Hurriyat "splitist" council claims that this is a "religious" visit and not a "political" visit. I mean how hollow and empty these self-proclaimed bastions of human rights can be. Don't their standards of human-rights apply globally or is that they are willing to brush the human-rights issue in Xinjiang under the carpet conviniently just for free trips. Please, by all means discuss politics as well, if not politics atleast have a little bit self-respect and discuss human rights

Also from http://www.ptinews.com/news/386650_Mirw ... apled-visa

It is unfortunate that Government of India has restricted the Kashmiris from travelling to China with the stapled visa being provided by the country to the residents of Jammu and Kashmir. Let the Kashmiris, including students and academics, be allowed to visit China on stapled visa," Mirwaiz told reporters outside Jamia Masjid.

If I was running GoI, I would just allow people who get visas on a seperate piece of paper to stick the visa's on the passport with pucca Desi glue then let the Chinese deal with that Beijing Airport.

[L Ram]

Press Trust Of India
Geneva, November 22, 2009
First Published: 08:17 IST(22/11/2009)
Last Updated: 13:47 IST(22/11/2009)


Print



After being snubbed, China has conveyed to India that it has no intention of playing a broker in Indo-Pak relations and favours direct talks between them.

Beijing has communicated to New Delhi that it respects its stance that there was no role for any third party in mediation of Indo-Pak affairs, Indian government sources said.

China has said there is no change in its position that Indo-Pak relations are bilateral in nature, according to sources accompanying Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on his way to Washington.

India was annoyed when a Sino-US joint statement, issued after talks between President Barack Obama and President Hu Jintao in Beijing last week, made a mention of Indo-Pak relations.

India has made it clear that it is not ready to accept "guardianship" of anybody, whether China, the US or any other
country, even if mild-handed.

With regard to Hurriyat leader Mirwaiz Umar Farooq seeking to give China a role on Kashmir issue, the Indian government sources were dismissive, saying he was trying to find a place for himself and emerge as a "great mediator".

"Mirwaiz is trying to bring K-word (in China context) which does not exist," a source said referring to the Hurriyat
leader's contention on Saturday that China has a link with Kashmir issue as Aksai Chin, part of the state, is under its
control.

The sources maintained that he was free to travel to China but on proper visa.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed ... 78963.aspx

isn't this something intrusting turn around in this.

[Guddu]

Same fundoos(Indian policymakers) send their kids to western colleges and take pride in it. A characteristic of puppet country. Its similar to how small almost bankrupt African countries send their officers and kids to study in Indian colleges. Where chinese policymakers send their kids?.

Sitting in massa land I can attest that Chinese out number Indians at most universities and labs. It seems you are upset that Indians send their kids abroad for study. Why do you think that is not beneficial to India ?. I can think of multiple ways how India benefits from this.

[Hari Seldon]

x-post

[youtube]<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/8ZXEShSIFks&hl ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/8ZXEShSIFks&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>[/youtube]

OMG OMG OMG

Watch the fifth and sixth minutes!!!



MUST WATCH!

[RamaY]

^^^ very funny Hari-ji.

Looks like Unkil is really performing secular-kamasutra with lizard. In return he is allowing lizard sh1t around in our backyard.

Either way it is not a good scenario for Bharat. In some ways India's wait and watch approach is correct in the sense that karma will catch up with them sooner than later. What India can do in the meantime is to put its house in order, especially in the areas of internal security, poverty alleviation, and strong infrastructure.

[Sanjay M]

Yeah, that was pretty hilarious. It's certainly making the rounds of the internet.

Anyway, the only ones who are having the heartiest laugh are the Atlanticists, who are happy the US is indebted to China, because it will tie Uncle Sam to the Dragon's tail. The Atlanticists care little about US national interests, and everything about keeping the heat on Russia. They expect to be able to do this by using both the US and China to face off against the Russians, thereby keeping the Russian bear off Europe.

The fact that the US position is becoming less tenable by the day is of little consequence to them. They will continue to steadfastly keep the US focused against Russia, and any increased US dependency on China due to debt will be used by the Atlanticists to make a case for softening the US posture towards China. (ie. "don't upset the Chinese, because then the US economy will be destroyed")

Meanwhile, the Germans are increasingly moving to "look East" towards Russia, which the USA can't do anything about.

2010 is going to be a watershed year for hyperinflation in the US. The cost of living in the US is going to rise heavily, and cause a collapse in consumer spending. This will lead to a massive rollback of the US economy, as the dollar plunges.