Managing Chinese Threat

[SSridhar]

China Offers to Finance 30% of India's Infrastructure Development - Economic Times

China wants to fund a big chunk of India's infrastructure development even though previous attempts have been rebuffed by a government nervous about allowing its neighbour to enter critical areas such as telecom or power over security worries.

But that hasn't discouraged the Chinese from making a concerted bid that envisages its companies and workers getting deeply involved in upgrading India's decrepit rail, road and power infrastructure bes ..

A Chinese working group submitted a five-year trade and economic planning cooperation plan to the Indian government in the first week of February, offering to finance as much as 30 per cent of the $1trillion targeted investment in infrastructure during the 12th Five-Year Plan (2012-17) to the tune of about $300 billion.

That's the biggest such offer by any one country, exceeding the funds contributed by Japan, which has traditionally financed some of India's most ambitious projects. The commerce department is likely to hold an inter-ministerial meeting next week to discuss the investment proposal by China to identify sectors of India's interest, a government official familiar with developments told ET.

The economic road map presented to the Indian government has identified key sectors such as railways, roads, telecom, and nuclear and solar power among others for investment.

"China has expressed a strong desire to invest in India's infrastructure sector," the official said. "However, it needs to be assessed how to leverage that. We need to identify sectors from where we can gain, such as software or IT, pharma, among others."

A Chinese interest is particularly high in railways, in particular electrification, high-speed trains, wagons, last-mile connectivity and gauge conversion. It has also identified sewage treatment and tunnel building as areas wh ..

India however is not keen on allowing Chinese investment in sensitive areas like the northeast and Jammu & Kashmir. The two countries share a turbulent past, having gone to war with each other in 1962 leaving unresolved border issues that flare up occasionally.

As the two most populous countries in the world, they also compete for resources globally, with the Chinese more successful at adding to their reserves.

The home and defence ministries are wary of Chinse investment for strategic and security reasons, the latest example being 100 per cent FDI in railways that the government aims to allow.

Regarding this, the home ministry has already flagged security concerns over Chinese companies investing in sensitive areas such as the northeast and Jammu and Kashmir.

"The Chinese have offered to make big investments in India," a Planning Commission official said. "Since there are nine ministries that have been engaging with China at different levels, the department of commerce wants to strike a common strategy."

China contributed just 0.15 per cent or $313 billion of India's total foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows between April 2000 and December 2013.

Japanese investment amounted to $15.3 billion, about 7.3 per cent of the total. The big Japan-funded projects include the ongoing Delhi Mumbai Industrial Corridor and Delhi Metro. The Japanese are also in talks to build a road network in the northeast region.

The Japanese government has approved $4.5 billion for non-commercial projects through Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and commercial lending through Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC), which has 26 per cent equity in DMIC. Besides, Japan has recently committed a loan of $2 billion for Delhi metro.
While India and China are targeting $100 billion in bilateral trade by 2015, the balance is heavily skewed in favour of the latter. At the end of fiscal 2012-13, China's trade surplus with India was about $39 billion.China doesn't see this narrowing in the short to medium term due to the nature of the two economies, with India being services led and China a manufacturing economy.

"Allowing Chinese investment into infrastructure sector looks a bit dodgy from the look of it as it will lead to higher import content, likely to worsen the trade deficit between the two countries," said Biswajit Dhar, director general of Research and Information System, a think tank.

"Our strategy should be to let them come with a package, wherein we identify a few parts of the country where they develop the infrastructure and set up manufacturing units there like in case of SEZs (special economic zones)."

China is already in talks with the Indian government to set up industrial parks in India in sectors such as agro-processing and manufacturing.

India's Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion, the nodal body for foreign direct investment policy, has identified sites in Uttar Pradesh, Haryana and Andhra Pradesh where Chinese companies could set up such units. The government is hopeful that this will help narrow the trade deficit with China.

[SSridhar]

China's Assurance on PoK Corridor - Ananth Krishnan, The Hindu

China on Thursday said the economic corridor that it is planning to construct to link its western Xinjiang region to Pakistan, through parts of the disputed Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), was not directed at “a third party” and would not pose any “detriment” to India’s concerns on the Kashmir issue.

Parts of the economic corridor, which envisages expanding road links along the Karakoram highway and building energy pipelines, runs through PoK, which borders the Xinjiang region and provides the only possible land link between China and Pakistan.

While India has voiced its concerns over the project, citing China's stated position of not interfering in the Kashmir dispute, Chinese officials have maintained that their investments were only on a commercial basis and “without prejudice” to the dispute.

This week, China and Pakistan discussed taking forward the corridor plan, during the ongoing visit of President Mamnoon Hussain to Beijing.

Both sides on Wednesday signed an agreement for upgrading the Karakoram highway from the China border all the way to Islamabad.

On India's concerns about the corridor passing through PoK, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying told reporters that China's cooperation with Pakistan on the project was “to improve well being.”

“The relevant cooperation is not directed at a third party, and it will have no detriment to the relevant parties’ position on the [Kashmir] issue,” she said.

Ms. Hua reiterated China’s position that it would not involve itself in the dispute between India and Pakistan.

The Vietnam oil blocks were not even in the EEZ of China when they objected to Indian participation. We should also recognize ROC and claim that India would not involve in disputes between the two and India's recognition was 'without prejudice' to their dispute.

[Philip]

Obama fingering the "T" card?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/f ... -japan-war

Obama to host Dalai Lama amid strained China-US ties
Beijing condemns ‘gross interference’ as relations remain strained by territorial disputes with Japan and others in region

[SSridhar]

Cabinet Will Decide Defense Role: Abe - Japan Times

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said Thursday that Cabinet approval is enough to change the government’s interpretation of war-renouncing Article 9 and allow Japan to help defend allied nations.

Previous administrations have followed the interpretation by the Cabinet Legislation Bureau that Japan cannot exercise the right of collective self-defense. Abe said the decision will be made by the Cabinet, not by the head of the bureau.

“Ultimately, the Cabinet will approve the reinterpretation,” Abe said during a session of the powerful Lower House Budget Committee. “And I am the one who is ultimately responsible for the Cabinet.”

He said that the administration will consider the issue along with the ruling camp before the matter comes before the Cabinet for approval, and the administration would also submit bills to the Diet necessary to amend the Self-Defense Forces Law.

Abe apparently wants to go ahead with the reinterpretation before Tokyo and Washington compile new Japan-U.S. defense cooperation guidelines at the end of this year, as collective self-defense would play a crucial part in upping Japan’s role in the alliance.

He made the remarks a week after the opposition camp and some media branded him as ignoring the concept of constitutionalism by claiming that a prime minister, if his party wins a public mandate at the ballot box, can change the interpretation of the Constitution even though it has been established through years of Diet debate.

On Thursday he rebuffed the criticism, saying he never claimed he alone can make the final decision on whether to assume the right of collective self-defense.

[anupmisra]

Is the proposed Chinese investment of $300 Bn. in the form of loans (debt), convertible debt or equity? Chinese are in the loan-to-own mind set. Ask the Africans. They are ruing the day they invited the Chinese to "invest" in their natural resources.

Also, what are the strings tied to these deals? Is it "Must use Chinese equipment, labor and management"? If so, then this is an indirect way to invest back into their own country.

Are there other better options available to India? I am sure there are.

Buyer beware!

[svinayak]

China's Assurance on PoK Corridor - Ananth Krishnan, The Hindu

China on Thursday said the economic corridor that it is planning to construct to link its western Xinjiang region to Pakistan, through parts of the disputed Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), was not directed at “a third party” and would not pose any “detriment” to India’s concerns on the Kashmir issue.

Parts of the economic corridor, which envisages expanding road links along the Karakoram highway and building energy pipelines, runs through PoK, which borders the Xinjiang region and provides the only possible land link between China and Pakistan.

While India has voiced its concerns over the project, citing China's stated position of not interfering in the Kashmir dispute, Chinese officials have maintained that their investments were only on a commercial basis and “without prejudice” to the dispute.

This week, China and Pakistan discussed taking forward the corridor plan, during the ongoing visit of President Mamnoon Hussain to Beijing.

Both sides on Wednesday signed an agreement for upgrading the Karakoram highway from the China border all the way to Islamabad.

On India's concerns about the corridor passing through PoK, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying told reporters that China's cooperation with Pakistan on the project was “to improve well being.”

“The relevant cooperation is not directed at a third party, and it will have no detriment to the relevant parties’ position on the [Kashmir] issue,” she said.

Ms. Hua reiterated China’s position that it would not involve itself in the dispute between India and Pakistan.

The Vietnam oil blocks were not even in the EEZ of China when they objected to Indian participation. We should also recognize ROC and claim that India would not involve in disputes between the two and India's recognition was 'without prejudice' to their dispute.

India has every right to destroy that corridor when ever it sees that this corridor is used to attack India with military supplies in the corridor. Any Army or defence in that corridor is seen as a direct threat to security of India.

[AjitK]

Is the proposed Chinese investment of $300 Bn. in the form of loans (debt), convertible debt or equity? Chinese are in the loan-to-own mind set. Ask the Africans. They are ruing the day they invited the Chinese to "invest" in their natural resources.

Also, what are the strings tied to these deals? Is it "Must use Chinese equipment, labor and management"? If so, then this is an indirect way to invest back into their own country.

Are there other better options available to India? I am sure there are.

Buyer beware!

They will push for deals for their State corporations. It has already happened, I'm afraid.

Chinese banks have given billions of dollars to Indian power companies and their State corporations have signed deals worth around $10 bn for power generation equipment. Whenever the govt. proposed to increase duties on Chinese power equipment, there was resistance from some Indian power companies. Granted we didn't have manufacturing capacity at such scale but the Chinese have managed to create a lobby in India.

Beware of Cheap Lending from China

India has much to consider. Recently, China made
 news by lending money 
to Anil Ambani’s Reliance Communications, for the 
second time. Last month, the Reserve 
Bank of India approved a refinancing of 
foreign currency convertible bonds worth $1.18bn by a consortium of Chinese banks for the prominent Indian industrialist. It was the largest refinancing of its kind for an Indian company. The seven-year loan was offered at a 5% interest rate. In 2011, Ambani also needed cash - $1.9bn - to help finance his 3G telecommunications infrastructure for Reliance Communications. Recorded as the largest financing in the history of India’s telecom sector, the loan was underwritten by the China Development Bank. Reliance said the average projected interest cost savings on the loan are valued at $100mn a year.

As part of the $1.9bn loan agreement, Reliance would import a part of
 its telecommunications equipment from Chinese vendors, namely Huawei Technologies. Huawei, a quasi-government company partially owned by the People’s Liberation Army, has since invested $200mn in another Indian telecommunications company, Unitech Wireless, a major competitor of Ambani’s Reliance. The loan opened the door for China to enter one India’s largest markets, which is key, since the Indian government had been working to keep Chinese companies out.

[raj.devan]

Huawei technologies was founded by a retired civilian member of the PLA, and has a chairwoman who originally worked for the communications department of the Guan-bo - Chinese State Security. But there's little evidence that it is owned by the Chinese government or by the PLA.

[Prem]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... harp-war-/

China Readies For Short, Sharp War with Japan

(Cut Paste Haram & Refused)

[raj.devan]

Liu predicted that by 2040 “China will have the power to contain the dominance of the U.S. Navy in the Pacific and Indian Oceans

The father of the modern Chinese navy himself admitted that his country cannot challenge the US security umbrella over East Asia for another 25 years. So how exactly do they believe they can have a 'Short Sharp War' with Japan and not escalate it into a full blown bombing retaliation from the USN?

[SSridhar]

China should shed expansionist mindset: Modi - The Hindu

Wading into a foreign policy issue for the first time, Narendra Modi on Saturday asked China to shed its “expansionist mindset”, making it clear that no power on earth can snatch Arunachal Pradesh from India.

“China should shed its expansionist policy and forge bilateral ties with India for peace, progress and prosperity of both the nations,” the BJP prime ministerial candidate said addressing a meeting in Pasighat in his current election campaign.

“Arunachal Pradesh is an integral part of India and will always remain so. No power can snatch it from us. People of Arunachal Pradesh didn’t come under pressure or fear of China,” he said.

“I swear in the name of this soil that I will never allow the state to disappear...breakdown and to bow down,” Mr. Modi said to a thunderous applause from people gathered near the mighty Siang River.

He said China should shed its expansionist mindset because the world of today does not accept it. The entire world is moving towards development, he said.

“China needs to change its stand. China should shed its expansionist mindset and adopt the plank of development. Focus is on the development all over the world,” the Gujarat Chief Minister said.

Lauding the patriotic nature of the people, Mr. Modi said that because of the people, who were guarding the state as well as the country as sentinels, Arunachal remained an integral part of the country.

“The people here are real patriots as they salute their counterparts with ‘Jai Hind’ and are zealously protecting the state’s territory..... They gave a befitting reply to the advancing Chinese army during 1962 and the British and several army personnel from the state also fought with Pakistan during the Kargil war,” he said.

[Bade]

One way to manage Chinese threat is make them invest heavily in India (hard dollars). To some extent that is what the US is doing. Do all that and say exactly what Modi said in ArP often as necessary.

[SSridhar]

India's Maritime Gateway to the Pacific - Rajeev Ranjan Chaturvedy, The Hindu

Being one of the most important seas of the world, geopolitically, economically and strategically, the South China Sea (SCS) attracts considerable attention in the strategic community in India. It continues to be seen as one of the most difficult regional conflicts in the Asia-Pacific and an “arena of escalating contention.” India has vital maritime interests in the SCS. Around 55 per cent of India’s trade in the Asia-Pacific transits through the SCS region. In fact, in recent times, New Delhi has become more active in expressing its interest in the freedom of navigation in the SCS and the peaceful resolution of territorial disputes between Beijing and its maritime neighbours.

Strategic importance

The SCS is an important junction for navigation between the Pacific and Indian Oceans. It connects with the Indian Ocean through the Malacca Strait to the southwest, and commands access to the East China Sea to the northeast. The sea lane running between the Paracel and Spratly Islands is used by oil tankers moving from the Persian Gulf to Japan as well as by warships en route from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific. Security in the SCS is a concern both for regional countries such as China, Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia, as well as the extra-regional countries, including India, due to their strategic and economic interests in this region. Any conflict in the SCS will pose a threat to regional and international security.

Territorial sovereignty, contention on energy, significance of the geographic location, threat to maritime security and overlapping maritime claims are at the core of the SCS dispute. Some scholars suggest that for the next 20 years, the SCS conflict will probably remain the “worst-case” threat to peace and security in the ASEAN region.

The SCS, an integrated ecosystem, is one of the richest seas in the world in terms of marine flora and fauna, coral reefs, mangroves, seagrass beds, fish and plants. The sea accounts for approximately 10 per cent of the annual global fisheries catchment, making it extremely viable for the fishing industries of nearby countries. Furthermore, value-added production (canning, filleting, fresh, frozen and chilled processing) has translated into valuable foreign exchange earnings and job opportunities for countries in the region. However, China has been imposing fishing rules to operate in the disputed waters, resulting in serious maritime security concerns and objections from other claimant states. Recently, China’s new fishing rules which came into effect on January 1, 2014 raised questions about its efforts to exercise jurisdiction over all fishing activities in the disputed waters.

Furthermore, the region richly laden in both oil and natural gas has led to speculation that the disputed territories could hold potentially significant energy resources. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates, the SCS contains 11 billion barrels of oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in proved and probable reserves. EIA has difficulties in making accurate estimates of oil and natural gas in the area because of the lack of exploration and territorial disputes. Hence, reserve estimates in the area vary greatly. According to the Chinese Ministry of Land and Resources, the SCS oil reserves are estimated to be around 23 to 30 billion tonnes and 16 trillion cubic metres of natural gas. There may also be additional hydrocarbon reserves in underexplored areas of the sea. Most notably, the SCS occupies a significant geostrategic position in terms of international shipping as a majority of energy shipments and raw materials have to pass through it.

Undoubtedly, the SCS is a critical corridor between the Pacific and Indian Ocean for commercial and naval shipping. In view of the emerging challenges in the region, India is strengthening its engagement with the ASEAN region steadily. New Delhi recognises the strategic importance of Southeast Asia and the Indian Ocean for defence of the Indian peninsula. India’s prosperity is dependent, almost exclusively, on sea trade. Land routes from the Indian subcontinent are few and provide little facility for commerce. Safeguarding the sea lanes is therefore indispensable for India’s development as its future is dependent on the freedom of the vast water surface. A secure and safe sea lane is important for India’s industrial development, commercial growth and a stable political structure.

There are compelling reasons for India to protect the sea lanes in the SCS. First, it considers an unimpeded right of passage essential for peace and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific region. Second, India favours peaceful resolution of the dispute, in accordance with international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, as opposed to the use of threat in resolving competing claims. Access to resources such as oil, natural gas, food and minerals is now high on the agenda of global issues to be faced in the years ahead. India’s increasing involvement in the SCS region illustrates the relationship between its strategy and the need for resources, and for the routes and logistical systems necessary for their transportation.

Roadblocks

There are some apprehensions in New Delhi about Beijing’s ambitions in the SCS. Chinese assertiveness and her tendency to unilaterally seek to change the status quo has the potential to impinge upon India’s commercial and strategic interests in the SCS. Though military conflict over freedom of navigation and access to maritime resources is neither necessary nor inevitable, it is natural for India to address China’s “threat perception” and to promote its national interest.

India has a legitimate interest in safeguarding the sea lanes and access to maritime resources. With a considerable expansion of India’s engagement with the SCS’ littoral states, India appears to be emerging, genuinely so, as an indispensable element in the strategic discourse of this region. India could be a valuable security partner for several nations in the Asia-Pacific region, provided it sustains a high economic growth rate and nurtures the framework of partnership that it has enunciated in the region.

(Rajeev Ranjan Chaturvedy is a research associate at the Institute of South Asian Studies, Singapore.)

[SSridhar]

China Summons US Diplomat - Ananth Krishnan, The Hindu

China on Saturday said it had summoned a top American diplomat to express its “strong indignation” over Friday’s meeting between President Barack Obama and exiled Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama in Washington.

Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Zhang Yesui on Friday night summoned the deputy chief of mission of the U.S. Embassy here, Daniel Kritenbrink, and lodged “solemn representations,” the state-run Xinhua news agency said.

Mr. Zhang told him the meeting “seriously undermined” relations and “seriously violated the U.S. commitment of not supporting Tibet independence.” He said the Tibetan issue was “the domestic affair of China” and the U.S. “bears no right to interfere.”

China’s expectedly angry response echoed its similar opposition to Mr. Obama’s previous two meetings with the Dalai Lama, in 2010 and 2011. China has often exerted pressure on foreign leaders and warned them that bilateral ties, and even trade relations, could suffer if they hosted the Dalai Lama.

Mr. Obama first hosted the Dalai Lama in February 2010. On that occasion, the White House appeared to attempt to assuage China’s anger by playing down the meeting, which took place not in the official and symbolic Oval Office but in the Map room, and away from the glare of the cameras.

Mr. Obama's second meeting with the Dalai Lama came more than a year later, in July 2011, amid perceptions that the U.S., which was deepening engagement and seeking Chinese cooperation on a range of issues from trade to North Korea, was giving less weight to Tibet-related issues than in the past.

Friday’s meeting also took place in the Map room, with the White House again appearing to tone down the affair. The Dalai Lama was not seen entering or leaving the White House by official photographers.

Mr. Obama reiterated that the U.S. did not support Tibetan independence, but affirmed his support for Tibet’s religious, cultural and linguistic identity and for ensuring Tibetans’ human rights. He pointed out that the Dalai Lama himself had sought genuine autonomy for Tibetans, and not independence, in his “middle way” approach.

China, however, repeated its accusations that the Dalai Lama was a “splittist.”

The Foreign Ministry in a statement described the exiled spiritual leader as “a political exile who has long engaged in anti-China secessionist activities in the name of religion.”

A commentary by the official Xinhua news agency criticised the Dalai Lama’s “middle way” approach as “nothing but smoke and mirrors, camouflage and deceit.”

[SSridhar]

Australia endorses code-of-conduct for South China Sea - Japan Times

MANILA – Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop on Thursday voiced her support for the completion of a “code of conduct” aimed at reducing tensions amid China’s aggressive claim to almost all of the South China Sea.

Bishop, who is on a visit to the Philippines, said she discussed the matter with her Filipino counterpart, Albert del Rosario.

There have been heightened tensions between China and its neighbors — including the Philippines — because of disputes over maritime territory.

Bishop said Australia favoured the push by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to craft a “code of conduct” to better manage the issues.

“In the case of the South China Sea, we support ASEAN objectives in concluding a code of conduct with China, and we hope that there will be some early progress on that,” she said. “We urge all sides not to escalate tensions,” she added.

ASEAN has been trying for more than a decade to secure agreement from China on a legally binding code of conduct aimed at reducing tensions and the risk of violence in the South China Sea.

Among ASEAN members are Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam, which along with China and Taiwan, have claims to parts or all of the South China Sea.

China claims almost all of the South China Sea, even up to the borders of its neighbors.

Bishop stressed that her country was not taking any side in the dispute and urged that all issues should be resolved “peacefully.”

Bishop said the South China Sea was a key interest to Australia since 60 percent of its exports and 40 percent of its imports passed through the area.

The Philippines has been seeking more international support to challenge China’s claims to the South China Sea.

Del Rosario said the Philippines had been forced to seek U.N. arbitration because it had “exhausted all (other) possibilities,” in arguing its case with China.

He also said that the Philippines and Australia would be boosting their defense cooperation, especially since a “status of visiting forces agreement” between the two countries went into effect in 2012.

Australia already provides military training and education and conducts “table-top” exercises with the Philippines but the agreement opens the door to actual joint military exercises in Philippine territory.

He also thanked Australia for the extensive aid, including the dispatch of Australian troops, ships and aircraft, given to the Philippines after Super Typhoon Haiyan ravaged the central islands in November.

[SSridhar]

BJP-led Govt will fine-tune China policy - Saibal Dasgupta, ToI

A Chinese thinktank had more of less predicted BJP leader Narendra Modi's stand on Arunachal Pradesh. If "Right-deviant" party as represented by BJP comes to power, Sino-Indian relations may proceed in a "learning curve", state-run China Institute of International Studies said in its journal, China International Studies on Sunday.

"Of course, whichever political force assumes power in the coming election, India's fundamental policy towards China would not change dramatically, but one would definitely see some 'fine-tuning' of the strategic tendency and certain specific issues in India's China policy," the article by Lan Jianxue, a researcher at the institute said.

Modi last week had warned China about its "expansionist mindset" while speaking at a public meeting in Arunachal Pradesh. "Arunachal Pradesh is an integral part of India and will always remain so. No power can snatch it from us. People of Arunachal Pradesh didn't come under pressure or fear of China," he had said. China had earlier objected to even Prime Minister Manmohan Singh holding public meetings in the state, which it claims belongs to it.

However, the Chinese think-tank did not seem clear about the views of Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi and "young Turks" in the party, and their perception of India-China relations.

"There are not many 'China hands' among young Turks in the Congress party and their position and views on India's China policy are not quite clear,"{This is indeed a tragedy when our political aspirants do not accord any priority to foreign relations} Lan wrote. He then made a surprising observation that some Chinese analysts are nervous about India's growing relationship with the west and fear it might actually use force against China.

On India's relations with the US, the article said, "This has led some Chinese commentators to think that India poses a threat to China and makes China nervous. They are afraid that India would attempt to use force to settle the boundary question or collaborate with the United States in containing China."

But Lan counters these fears saying the two countries are opposed to war and quotes former ambassador and foreign secretary Nirupama Rao to say the two countries will gain through healthy competition in the economic sphere.

"Even those strategic analysts and politicians in India, who still stubbornly cling to their view that China is 'a long-term threat to and a rival of India', tend to think that India can keep such threat and rivalry under control by way of economic engagement, military preparation, diplomatic skill and a balancing strategy of maneuvering among big powers, thus making the bilateral relationship less vulnerable to contingencies," Lan said.

[SSridhar]

China refutes Modi's expansionist mindset theory - The Hindu

China on Monday asserted that it had never waged a war to occupy “an inch of land of other countries”, two days after BJP’s prime ministerial candidate Narendra Modi slammed the country for its “expansionist mindset”.

“You mentioned expansionism by the Chinese side. I believe all of you can see that China has never waged a war of aggression to occupy an inch of land of other countries,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying told reporters while responding to questions on Mr. Modi’s remarks.

“We always reiterate that we take real actions to commit through the peaceful development path” and are committed to good neighbourliness and cooperative relations, she said.

“There has never been any armed clashes in border areas over the years. So there is very strong evidence that we have the capability to maintain peace there. This is very good for the future development of the bilateral relations,” she said, highlighting that there was no major confrontation at Sino-Indian borders after the 1962 war.

“It is not only good for our two people but also to the whole region,” Ms. Hua said, adding that “we hope to work together with our Indian counterpart to that end”.

Mr. Modi, at a rally in Pasighat in Arunachal Pradesh on Saturday, asked China to shed its “expansionist mindset”.

“China should shed its expansionist policy and forge bilateral ties with India for peace, progress and prosperity of both the nations,” he said.

“Arunachal Pradesh is an integral part of India and will always remain so. No power can snatch it from us. People of Arunachal Pradesh didn’t come under pressure or fear of China,” Mr. Modi said.

Responding to Mr. Modi’s remarks, Ms. Hua said, “our position on the Eastern sector of the boundary is very consistent and clear cut. We would like to develop good neighbourliness and friendly relations with our neighbours and resolve relevant disputes and differences through dialogue and consultations.”

China claims Arunachal Pradesh as Southern Tibet and it is part of the dispute over the 4000 km-long Line of Actual Control between the two countries.

Ms. Hua said currently China and India are maintaining good momentum of bilateral relations.

“The two leaders have degree of consensus on the significance of growing bilateral relations. We hope to settle the boundary negotiations as soon as possible,” she said.

Stating that the India-China Boundary dispute is a leftover from history, Ms. Hua said, “That our two countries have a dispute and differences on the boundary question is a fact that is clear to all to see.”

Asserting that both India and China are committed to resolving the boundary dispute through peaceful negotiations, Ms. Hua highlighted the Special Representatives mechanism, headed by National Security Advisor Shivsankar Menon and Chinese State Councillor Yang Jiechi, which held 17th round of border talks in New Delhi this month.

“Positive progress has been made (at the talks) and both sides spoke very highly of the positive outcomes of the meeting,” she said.

Both countries are working hard to resolve relevant differences through friendly dialogue and consultations and “this point is beyond any doubt and any question. China has proven this with its real action,” Ms. Hua said.

The boundary issue is very sensitive and complicated. It cannot be solved overnight with few meetings or consultations, she stressed.

“There is one point that is clear that both China and India have made clear their resolve that is to carry out relevant negotiations and dialogue to peacefully resolve disputes, so as to find a mutually acceptable framework.

Pending that both countries will commit to peace and tranquillity,” Ms. Hua said.

“Now we want to maintain peace and tranquillity in border areas with relevant parties in India,” she added.

China always gives inane, circuitous, not-so-easily understandable replies to simple questions. They are never direct and always couch their stance in allegorical, well-hidden statements.

[SSridhar]

Chinese incursions on LAC discussed at Border Talks - The Hindu

India and China on Monday discussed boundary issues and implementation of a recently-concluded border pact during the sixth round of the Annual Defence Dialogue between the two sides.

At the talks held in New Delhi, the Chinese side was headed by Deputy Chief of People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Wang Guanzhong while Defence Secretary R. K Mathur led the Indian delegation.

The Chinese team also met Defence Minister A. K Antony after the talks, Defence Ministry officials said.

During the sixth round of Defence Secretary-level talks, the two countries are understood to have reviewed the implementation of the Border Defence Cooperation Agreement (BDCA) signed in October last year.

The issue of border transgressions by the Chinese troops is also learnt to have come up for discussion at the meeting.

Incursions by the Chinese troops have taken place along the Line of Actual Control even after the two sides reached the BDCA. India has been saying that though the pact does not guarantee an end to these incursions, it has helped in resolving the border incidents at a faster pace.

The proposal for setting up a hotline between the DGMO-level officials is also understood to have been discussed at the meeting.

India and China are also exploring the possibility of having joint exercises between the air forces and the navies.

[SSridhar]

China moves to keep momentum of border talks - Sandeep Dikshit, The Hindu

China on Monday surprised India at the sixth Annual Defence Dialogue, offering to send its Defence Minister Chang Wanquan in the second half of this year to maintain the momentum of talks on the border issue and foster understanding between the two defence establishments.

The offer came during two-and-a-half hours of discussions, led by Defence Secretary R.K. Mathur and the visiting Deputy Chief of General Staff of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA), Lt. Gen. Wang Guanzhong.

This is the third straight year that the Defence Ministers will hold a structured meeting. Defence Minister A.K. Antony visited China last year and Chinese Minister of National Defence Guang Li had come to India the preceding year.

China also agreed to send a senior PLA officer to hold discussions with the Indian Army’s Director-General of Military Operations (DGMO) on a hotline between the Operations Directorate of both armies. As the PLA is structured differently, an officer of rank equivalent to the Indian Army’s DGMO will be sent in the second half of the year.

India feels that the Border Defence Cooperation Agreement (BDCA) — the latest in the steps by both sides to eliminate the possibility of hostilities on the border — indicates the need for a hotline, though it does not say so specifically. The perception is that the Chinese have agreed to a hotline, and the two officials dealing with military operations will discuss how it will operate. A Defence Ministry release said they would discuss “practical measures for management of border issues.” The two sides also reviewed maritime cooperation and resolved to do more between the two navies.

In the brief time left for other issues, they discussed regional and global security issues, including the security situation in South Asia, the Asia-Pacific and the Indian Ocean region.

The next big meeting will be held in Beijing on March 18. The Indian side at the Strategic Economic Dialogue will be led by Planning Commission Deputy Chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia.

[harbans]

Narendra Modi’s challenge in foreign policy will undoubtedly lie West and North of India’s borders, however the main focus of his statesmanship and vision will certainly be based on how he deals with China. Undoubtedly the biggest Foreign Policy disaster India faced was Nehru ignoring Sardar Patel and allowing China a free reign on Tibet. Though highly downplayed in the Indian media, the magnanimity of the Nehruvian blunder on Tibet is so huge that it is inevitable, that with Modi’s arrival there will soon be bitter discourse on this rusty chapter..

Vicharprachar on Modi: Tibet and China Policy

[SSridhar]

Japan eyes arms exports to secure sea lanes - Japan Times

Japan will allow the export of arms to countries located along sea lanes to ensure the safe delivery of oil and other natural resources, while bolstering Japan’s defense cooperation with the United States by providing repair work for U.S. military aircraft overseas, according to a draft of new principles on arms exports.

In the first overhaul in 47 years of the long-held “three principles,” Prime Minister Shinzo Abe aims to promote exports of defense equipment and technology on condition that they benefit Japan’s security.

Japan adopted the “three principles” on arms exports in 1967, blocking the transfer of weapons to communist states, countries subject to embargoes under U.N. resolutions and those involved in international conflicts.

The new arms export control guidelines, together with a possible lift of the self-imposed ban on the exercise of the right of collective self-defense, would mark a major shift in postwar policies based on the war-renouncing Constitution.

Under the new principles, Japan would prohibit the export of weapons if they clearly undermine global peace and security. They would also require the government to impose strict checks on the transfer of arms, and conditionally allow their exports to a third country or their use for purposes other than originally stated.

The new rules would not specify communist states and countries involved in international conflicts as prohibited destinations, effectively paving the way to exporting arms to countries embroiled in a dispute.

They would also allow Japan to export arms when it joins an international joint development project, in which several countries contribute parts. This is apparently aimed, at least to start off, at the F-35 stealth fighter jet being developed by a U.S.-led consortium.

The rules would still state that the transfer of weapons will not be designed for “economic benefits,” and limit exports to certain situations. The new National Security Council would conduct “strict” screening of exports.

Given that one of the key challenges facing resource-poor Japan is to ensure safe delivery of oil and other resources, the new rules would enable the government to provide defense equipment such as infrared radar, spotlights and patrol vessels to the Philippines and Indonesia so they can combat piracy.

International organizations, such as the United Nations and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, would also be able to receive weapons from Japan under the new rules.

[SSridhar]

China accuses Japan of being a regional trouble-maker - Japan Times

China on Tuesday labeled Japan a “troublemaker” that is damaging regional peace and stability, firing back at earlier criticism from Tokyo over a spike in tensions in northeast Asia.

Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying was responding to comments by Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida that China’s military expansion in the region is a concern, although Kishida stopped short of calling China a threat.

Hua told a regularly scheduled news conference that China’s military posture is purely defensive and Japan is stirring up trouble with its own moves to expand its armed forces and alter its pacifist constitution. She accused Japanese officials of making inflammatory statements aimed at denying or glorifying the country’s militarist past, and said Japan should explain its strategic intentions.

“I think everybody will agree with me that Japan has already become a de facto troublemaker harming regional peace and stability,” Hua said.

Hua’s comments were the latest salvo in a war of words between the countries that has seen their diplomats invoke the villain from the Harry Potter books, Lord Voldemort, in describing each other’s motivations. Never very warm, bilateral ties took a nosedive after Japan in 2012 nationalized a string of uninhabited islands in the East China Sea that China claims as its own

[JE Menon]

>>“I think everybody will agree with me that Japan has already become a de facto troublemaker harming regional peace and stability,” Hua said.

It would be funny, if it wasn't so obviously indicative of how far China's leaders are from reality in terms of their understanding of international perception of them. Probably they don't care one way or the other. Not good for them, or for anybody else.

[SSridhar]

From NightWatch for the night of Feb. 25, 2014

China: At today's Foreign Ministry press conference, two separate questioners asked about China's position on Japanese nuclear stock piles of weapons grade plutonium and separated plutonium. The Chinese press spokesman hinted that Japan had sinister motives for storing large quantities of plutonium and related those motives to World War II.

Comment: Concern about Japanese stocks of fissile material, especially plutonium, became headline news after the Fukushima power plant disasters in 2011. New leaks of radioactive water in 2014 revived the concern. A published report from a symposium on managing spent nuclear fuel in January 2014 in Tokyo indicated that, "Japan has nearly 10 tons of plutonium on its own soil alone. That is enough to make 1,500 or so nuclear warheads. In addition to the risk of terrorists attacking the storage facilities and stealing plutonium, if Japan continues to accumulate plutonium without any economic rationale, and without firm plans for its immediate use in power generation, this can sow doubts about Japan's intentions," according to an expert at the symposium. The Chinese are following-up on the questions raised at the symposium. One expert said that experts in other East Asian countries - presumably China - interpret the Japanese plutonium stockpile as a nuclear deterrent becasue it shows Japan has the capability and the option to weaponize its plutonium quickly in the event of a crisis. Japan is the only country without nuclear arms and a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that is permitted to reprocess spent nuclear fuel into plutonium. Japanese delegates assured the symposium that Japan has no intention of weaponizing its plutonium because that would mean withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). On the other hand, in the event Japan came under the threat of a nuclear attack by North Korea, the NPT would be the least of Japan's concerns. In the post-war era, Japan has adhered strictly to its self-defense and non-nuclear doctrines as matters of public policy. What is now emerging bit-by-bit is that Japanese leaders also have made prudent investments in infrastructures and capabilities that would help ensure Japan's security in the event of a future existential threat.

North Korea would not be the only nation in Japan's mind. In any case, dismantling of the Pu stockpile in Japan would certainly not take place in Abe's tenure. The fact that Japan has accumulated this Pu over decades shows that Japan wants to protect itself in spite of its abhorrence to nuclear weapons.

[Suraj]

It would be funny, if it wasn't so obviously indicative of how far China's leaders are from reality in terms of their understanding of international perception of them. Probably they don't care one way or the other. Not good for them, or for anybody else.

I think they're very aware of reality, but that they're also keenly aware of the value of saying something bizarre a thousand times. They know no one will respond 'the Chinese official position is completely nuts and the official sounds like a loony'. In that regard they are keen students of human behavior - say the same nutty thing a thousand times and it suddenly starts to sound sensible...

[ramana]

SS, There is also the question of the type of Pu that is stored. It could be reactor grade.

[SSridhar]

ramana, possible. But, Japan had operated a reprocessing facility for a long time until it was shut down in c. 2007. The new 800-tonne Rokkasho plant is not 'officially' opened yet but has been under construction for a long time and I would imagine that it has been also functional for a long time without being announced as such. There is a chance that Japan possesses a considerable quantity of reprocessed Pu.

[Prem]

ramana, possible. But, Japan had operated a reprocessing facility for a long time until it was shut down in c. 2007. The new 800-tonne Rokkasho plant is not 'officially' opened yet but has been under construction for a long time and I would imagine that it has been also functional for a long time without being announced as such. There is a chance that Japan possesses a considerable quantity of reprocessed Pu.

Japani used to send /ship or store Pu in Great Cretin for reprocessing purpose. I heard the 10 Ton of Nippon Pu figure in late 80s.They must have much more now stored in Japan Itself.

[SSridhar]

Japani used to send /ship or store Pu in Great Cretin for reprocessing purpose. I heard the 10 Ton of Nippon Pu figure in late 80s.They must have much more now stored in Japan Itself.

Yes, Japan has stored 34 tonnes of processed Pu abroad (in France & the UK). The Rokkasho plant would add 8 tonnes every year to that stock, which would be easily 1500 weapons a year. It is the only non weaponised state to engage in reprocessing and stockpile such a huge amount of Pu. Of course, there is a history to it because Japan, like us, wanted to start on a breeding programme but halted it later. Then, there are issues of storage of spent fuel which is opposed by local governments etc.

[Prem]

Japan India Nuke Ngetiations should be centred on Reprocessing the PU 4 Hu only with Power generation as side benefit.

[member_19686]

To Counter Beijing, Japan Moves Closer to Taiwan
Japanese Taiwan Relations Act hints at a possible strategy to court Taipei at Beijing’s expense.
By Shannon Tiezzi

A report from Kyodo News International says that lawmakers from Japan’s Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) are trying to create a Japanese version of the Taiwan Relations Act, the U.S. law that governs Washington’s relations with Taipei.
Japan does not have diplomatic relations with Taiwan, but the proposed law would seek to formalize the current unofficial ties.
Specifically, the law would create “a basis for strengthening economic relations and personal exchange” with the island.
The law is championed by Japan-Taiwan Young Parliamentary Association on Economic Exchange, a group chaired by Nobuo Kishi, who happens to be the younger brother of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.
It’s unclear how broad of political support the new law would have or what the specifics would be.
Despite this, China wasted no time expressing its displeasure.
Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying told reporters that China was “deeply concerned” by the news.
“The Taiwan Question concerns China’s core interests. Whether Japan-Taiwan relations can be properly handled or not has a bearing on the political foundation of China-Japan relations,” Hua said.
She added that China was “firmly opposed” to the “attempt to strengthen Japan-Taiwan relations.”
An article by China’s state media organization Xinhua summarized Hua’s remarks, further reiterating China’s opposition to the move.
Calling the act the “Japanese Taiwan Relations Acts” is a bit misleading (and possibly intentionally provocative on Japan’s part).
The U.S. Taiwan Relations Act is most famous for providing the justification for regular U.S. arms sales to Taiwan.
Current reports indicate Japan’s bill would be restricted to furthering economic and cultural ties, avoiding the hot-button issue of defense partnerships with the island.
The idea of a Japanese bill to expand Taiwan relations is not new.
Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian called for such a law back in 2006. Chen’s idea for the act specifically mentioned security elements.
“We’d like to see a strategic dialogue mechanism set up between the two countries,” he said, adding that he hoped a Japan-Taiwan partnership could make an important contribution to regional security and stability. Current president Ma Ying-jeou has not repeated these calls, but he has described Taiwan’s relationship with Japan as a “special partnership” characterized by great warmth.
The 2014 vision for Japan’s own “Taiwan Relations Act” is more focused on economics, which accords with the domestic political needs of both Shinzo Abe and Ma Ying-jeou to shake off sluggish economic growth. According to Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Taiwan is Japan’s fifth-largest trading partner, and Japan is second only to China as Taiwan’s largest trading partner.
Deepening economic cooperation would be beneficial for both—and could also have political benefits. Highlighting Japan-Taiwan cooperation serves as a pointed counter-narrative to worsening China-Japan ties.
Despite the messy legacy of Japanese colonialism in Taiwan, popular sentiment towards Japan is positive overall.
According to a July 2013 report published by Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 65 percent of Taiwanese feel either “close” or “really close” to Japan.
Compare that to mainland China, where over 90 percent of Chinese have either an “unfavorable” or “relatively unfavorable” impression of Japan.
Notably, Japan and Taiwan have also worked together to lessen tensions over the disputed Senkaku Islands.
Like mainland China, Taiwan’s government claims sovereignty over the islands.
In April of last year, Taiwan and Japan came to a compromise in the form of a fisheries agreement that will allow Taiwanese fishing boats access to waters near the disputed islands.
Under the agreement, both sides shelved the territorial dispute and will cooperate to access fishing resources in the area—exactly the same sort of solution some experts have recommended for handling China and Japan’s dispute.
The timing of the fisheries agreement was interesting.
Taiwan and Japan had been negotiating since 1996, but the agreement was finally concluded at a time when Tokyo’s dispute with Beijing over the islands was reaching new levels of discord.
Concluding an agreement at that time was good PR for both Taipei and Tokyo.
Japan’s government could point to the agreement as evidence that it is willing to implement diplomatic solutions, implying that China bears the blames for lack of similar progress.
Meanwhile, Taiwan could remind the world of its claim to the islands, even while trying to stake out a larger political and diplomatic presence in the region.
Ma Ying-jeou, used the agreement as a chance to highlight his “East China Sea Peace Initiative.”
A Japanese bill strengthening ties to Taiwan could have similar political dividends.
It could help Japan’s government counter China’s claims that it seeks a return to militarism, while simultaneously providing another example of “standing up to China” for the domestic audience.
Japan’s Foreign Minister, Fumio Kishida, underlined last year that Japan-Taiwan ties are based on “our shared fundamental values of democracy, freedom, and peace.”
Under that formula, expanding relations with Taipei helps bolster Tokyo’s claim that Beijing is the problem driving regional tensions.
Conversely, Ma Ying-jeou’s administration could use closer ties with Tokyo to lessen Taiwan’s economic dependence on China.
It would also help Ma counter accusations from political rivals that he is unwilling to cross Beijing, or that he actively seeks to make Taiwan dependent on China as a precursor to unification.

http://chinhdangvu.blogspot.ca/2014/02/ ... um=twitter

[Suraj]

A fascinating insight into Chinese views of diaspora representing others - it calls the most recent US ambassador, a Chinese-American, a 'rotten banana' through official news media:
Chinese govt media calls US ambassador 'rotten banana'

The editorial "Farewell, Gary Locke" took direct aim at Locke's identity as a third-generation Chinese-American, calling him a "banana" — a racial term for Asians identifying with Western values despite their skin color.

"But when a banana sits out for long, its yellow peels will always rot, not only revealing its white core but also turning into the stomach-churning color of black," read the editorial carried by China News Service.

The author Wang Ping — likely a pseudonym — slammed Locke's portrayal as an official judicious with public funds but criticized him for being hypocritical as he retreated into his multimillion-dollar official residence and special-made, bullet-proof luxury vehicle.

Wang belittled Locke's inability to speak his ancestral language and accused him of failing to understand China's law but fanning "evil winds" in the ethnically sensitive regions of Tibet and Xinjiang.

"Not only did he run around by himself, he even served as a guide dog for the blind when he took in the so-called blind rights lawyer Chen Guangcheng and led him running," the editorial said. Chen later was allowed to leave China and now lives in the United States.

The editorial made a malicious Chinese curse at Locke, suggesting Locke's Chinese ancestors would expel him from the family clan should they know his behaviors.
The editorial "Farewell, Gary Locke" took direct aim at Locke's identity as a third-generation Chinese-American, calling him a "banana" — a racial term for Asians identifying with Western values despite their skin color.

"But when a banana sits out for long, its yellow peels will always rot, not only revealing its white core but also turning into the stomach-churning color of black," read the editorial carried by China News Service.

The author Wang Ping — likely a pseudonym — slammed Locke's portrayal as an official judicious with public funds but criticized him for being hypocritical as he retreated into his multimillion-dollar official residence and special-made, bullet-proof luxury vehicle.

Wang belittled Locke's inability to speak his ancestral language and accused him of failing to understand China's law but fanning "evil winds" in the ethnically sensitive regions of Tibet and Xinjiang.

"Not only did he run around by himself, he even served as a guide dog for the blind when he took in the so-called blind rights lawyer Chen Guangcheng and led him running," the editorial said. Chen later was allowed to leave China and now lives in the United States.

The editorial made a malicious Chinese curse at Locke, suggesting Locke's Chinese ancestors would expel him from the family clan should they know his behaviors.

Wang also made the innuendo that Locke should be blamed for the smog. "When he arrived, so did Beijing's smog," Wang wrote. "With his departure, Beijing's sky suddenly turned blue."

"Let's bid goodbye to the smog, and let's bid goodbye to the plague. Farewell, Gary Locke," ended the article, which was clearly inspired by Mao Zedong's 1949 piece, "Farewell, Leighton Stuart," that scoffed at the last American ambassador under the collapsing Nationalist government in Nanjing.

The piece shocked members of the Chinese public, who denounced the editorial as distasteful and offensive.

"This article by China News Service is the most shameless I have ever seen — not one of them but the most shameless," the popular online commentator Yao Bo said. "Without him, we probably still would not have known what PM2.5 is, and how did he bring the smog? You have played the snake in the Farmer and the Viper."

Another commentator Fastop Liu, known for his sharp tongue, said the piece is ungraceful. "When you call him a plague, you become a national shame as you lack diplomatic etiquette, damage the manner of a great power, and lose the face of all Chinese," Liu wrote.

Wang also made the innuendo that Locke should be blamed for the smog. "When he arrived, so did Beijing's smog," Wang wrote. "With his departure, Beijing's sky suddenly turned blue."

[sanjaykumar]

Ah these Chinese- as suave as always.

[Prem]

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Africa/2 ... xaggerated
The great China 'takeover' of Africa is greatly exaggerated
Investors from South Korea to Brazil and from India to South Africa are the new kids on the African block. Nor have old investors like the US, UK, France and Australia pulled out.

But Canadians, Americans, Britons, the French, and Australians still represent a heavy footprint in Africa. And a plethora of investors from other emerging economies are becoming more integrated into Africa's social and political life, Mr. Simons says. While not eclipsing China, these new kids on the Africa block are showing a dynamism previously hidden by China's shadow.
African trade with South Korea and Brazil has moved from single-digit billions in 2000 to more than $25 billion each in 2011. (Korean giant Samsung peppered the continent with $150 million in shops, technology, and employment between 2010 and 2012, the company says.) India's footprint is small, but growing at 400 percent a year, according to Páidrag Carmody at Trinity College Dublin in his 2013 study "The Rise of the BRICS in Africa."Investment by the emerging economic powerhouses of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS) has doubled since 2007 in Africa, though numbers are notoriously poor (see accompanying story). A 2013 United Nations study shows African foreign direct investment grew 5 percent, to $50 billion, while shrinking in nearly every other region.
Africa auctions off mining and oil exploration to a "broad array of companies from around the world that you did not see before," says Todd Moss, a former senior State Department official dealing with Africa who is now at the Center for Global Development in Washington, D.C.The push is being called a "rise of the rest" for Africa, or a new "South-South" partnership. Partly the story is of high rates of growth. New "greenfield investments" – business start-ups – from South Africa and the United Arab Emirates have eclipsed those of China, according to a new Ernst & Young study."People have said China is bolstering its 'soft power' through the use of charitable projects, Confucius Institutes, donations of medicines, etc.," Simons says. "But the truth is that most of these projects are lackluster."To be sure, China's role in Africa will never be insignificant. Large-scale symbolic projects such as the highway across Nigeria or the new African Union headquarters in Addis Ababa, built by China at a cost of $200 million and the tallest structure in Ethiopia's capital, are hard to miss. With trillions in cash reserves and few legal restrictions on public-private partnerships, China's presence in Africa grows daily.
But the idea that China and the West are the only competitors in a battle for Africa's resources and markets is outdated, says Ben Payton, an Africa analyst at Maplecroft, a Britain-based global risk analysis company. "In addition to Africa's traditional partners in the West, there is growing interest in Africa's resource wealth from companies in countries such as Brazil, India, Singapore, and South Korea," Mr. Payton says. "By some measures, Malaysia provided more foreign investment in Africa than China last year."Nations like Malaysia appeal to African states, says Mr. Moss, the former US-Africa trade official, as an "Asian model" that emphasizes strong political control and wealth. "Americans want both political openness and open markets, but Asians stick to a commercial relationship," he says.With only Asia growing faster as a region than Africa, foreign investment can be successful on the continent despite troubles such as constant power outages and muddled trade laws, according to Thomas Hansen, a senior Africa analyst at Control Risks, a security assessment firm. "It's one of the few places in the world now where you can get a relatively high return on your capital," he says.
In Nigeria, Africa's most populous country, with more than 160 million people, Indians own many of the supermarkets and computer shops. South Koreans are well known for making affordable electronics available. Brazil and Russia are growing players in Nigeria's gas and its 2.2 million-barrel-a-day oil export industry, the largest in Africa.South Africa, the largest economy in Africa, stands out as one of the most successful investors, leading the telecommunications industry on the continent and building shopping malls and supermarkets, according to Simons of IMANI. South African investment tends to be visible in terms of social impact, he adds."South Africa has the exceptional capacity to understand Africa," he says. "South African investments tend to be savvy."At a cafe in Abuja on a Sunday afternoon, waitress Becky Utase flips her BlackBerry in her hand. Despite rapid economic growth, the African continent is still the poorest in the world. Ms. Utase says foreign investment only matters to her if it somehow helps Nigerians live better lives. Mobile phone networks, she adds, mean the world to her.
Anti-China platforms
People in Africa often say they like China because the country's investors build roads, the needed predecessor to development and economic growth. But that doesn't necessarily translate into winning hearts and minds, according to Payton, the Africa analyst."Chinese companies are generally far less concerned with respecting internationally recognized labor standards than their Western counterparts," he says. "As a result, workforces and local communities in countries such as Zambia have become increasingly hostile to Chinese employers [see sidebar]."
This hostility feeds on itself when African governments use it to distract the public from their shortcomings, according to John Campbell, former US ambassador to Nigeria now at the Council on oreign Relations in New York.Both Zambia and Malawi have elected presidents who ran on anti-China platforms."The tendency," says Mr. Campbell, is "to blame the Chinese for certain domestic shortcomings, particularly about whatever government is in power."The main difference between Chinese investors and all the rest, according to Mathew Agabi, who works at a popular Indian-owned supermarket in Abuja, is that Chinese companies are known for importing their own workers, and that angers many Nigerians. Locals employed by Chinese companies also are expected to work what Nigerians call "slave hours."When Chinese companies don't hire locals and teach them technical know-how, Mr. Agabi says, they leave behind a community of workers that can't handle or maintain high-end operations. "South Korean companies don't have those issues," he says.Chinese investors are not alone in angering Africans. Nigerians complain that most foreign companies may hire a majority of locals, but then give choice positions to expatriate workers. Nigerians particularly loathe Western clothing companies that prefer to open factories in Asia and overlook a massive pool of unemployed laborers in Africa. "They should build factories," Agabi says.Investment anxiety, however, targets China because it tends to be the least accessible culturally, according to Payton. Few Africans speak Mandarin, and many fear that Chinese investments allow African governments to evade Western demands for compliance with human rights standards."In the long term, there is a risk that anger at perceived Chinese exploitation could escalate into a perception that China's political and economic clout enables it to exert a form of neocolonial domination over Africa," he says.On the other hand, he adds, China has championed poverty-alleviation programs at home and could serve as an example for policymakers in Africa."Chinese investment is not only providing Africa with new infrastructure and new sources of capital," he says. "It is also altering the horizons of policymakers and driving a new confidence in the continent's economic outlook."Back at The Clubhouse in Nigeria, manager Antoun says China may not be literally taking over Africa, but its presence is certainly palpable. A few years ago, Antoun says, he had one-fifth as many Chinese customers. Most of their work is in construction, he adds, and infrastructure draws other investors.When his place opened about seven years ago, it had been a canteen for a construction company, without air conditioning, reliable electricity, or even a fan."There was nothing, from decoration to infrastructure," he says.Antoun is not concerned that Chinese investors will drive others out because the Chinese tend to keep to themselves and avoid businesses with a high public profile, he says. "

[SSridhar]

NightWatch for the night of 3rd March 2014

China: The 3.01 Incident. On Saturday night, a group of knife-wielding attackers slashed frantically at crowds at the Kunming railway station, killing 29 people and injuring 143. Police shot dead four of them and captured an injured female attacker at the scene. Police said Monday that the remaining three suspects involved in the attack had been captured. Authorities said evidence at the crime scene showed that the attackers were associated with the Uighur separatist in Xinjiang, in western China. At the daily Foreign Ministry press conference on 3 March, the spokesman said the Chinese police are stepping up efforts to investigate and solve the serious incident of violent terrorism that occurred in Kunming, Yunnan, on the weekend. We have also noted that evidence such as some flags of the "East Turkistan" terrorist forces were indeed found on the scene according to related preliminary information released by the Chinese police. The relevant investigation is still ongoing. We believe that the relevant authorities will release the findings in a timely manner.

Comment: The Uighur separatists refer to Xinjiang as "East Turkestan" The Chinese have not confirmed that the attackers were ethnic Uighurs. Nor have they commented on the magnitude of the security lapse The Chinese are calling the attack their "9/11" attack. Several aspects of it suggest the Uighurs are innovating and learning. First is the location. Kunming is a tourist site, known for its ethnic diversity and an important rail center in southeast China. When Uighur separatists have attacked outside Xinjiang, they have tended to attack in the north, in Urumqi or Beijing. Kunming signifies a different targeting strategy and direction of threat. Police suggested the terrorists came from the Golden Triangle region of Burma, Thailand and Laos and moved northward into southern China. Authorities are not prepared for a terrorist attack from this direction. Other grisly features are the number of people killed or injured by eight attackers using only edged weapons. One Chinese security expert said he thought the timing and manner of the attack indicated careful planning and preparation. He also said it is warning of what to expect in the future.

[SSridhar]

US seeking to bolster naval presence in Japan: Defense report - Japan Times

The United States is seeking to enhance its naval presence in Japan — as well as its overall military presence in Southeast Asia — according to a report released by the Quadrennial Defense Review on Tuesday.

The plan is part of a continued U.S. commitment to the Asia-Pacific region that is occurring against the backdrop of China’s rising maritime prowess. In the report, the Defense Department issued a warning over the risk of conflict over sovereignty and natural resources in the area.

“We will continue our contributions to the U.S. rebalance to the Asia-Pacific region, seeking to preserve peace and stability in a region that is increasingly central to U.S. political, economic, and security interests,” the report said.

The navy plans to station 60 percent of its assets in the Pacific by 2020, while the plan will also include “enhancements to our critical naval presence in Japan.”

Rear Adm. William Lescher, deputy assistant secretary of the navy for budget, told reporters that the U.S. Navy currently has some 50 ships in the Pacific. “We expect by 2020 the number would be up around 65,” he said.

The report mentioned “greater risk that tensions over long-standing sovereignty disputes or claims to natural resources will spur disruptive competition or erupt into conflict.”

The department did not name any specific country in the QDR report, but China has been involved in a spate of territorial disputes with countries such as Japan and the Philippines in the East China Sea and South China Sea, actively maneuvering its ships in waters near contested islands.

“The rapid pace and comprehensive scope of China’s military modernization continues, combined with a relative lack of transparency and openness from China’s leaders regarding both military capabilities and intentions,” it said.

The report also said, “Challenges to our many allies and partners around the globe remain dynamic and unpredictable, particularly from regimes in North Korea and Iran,” which have nuclear programs.

“The North Korean regime continues to pursue interests counter to those of the United States,” the paper said, adding that Washington “closely monitors the situation through military and diplomatic channels” in coordination with South Korea, Japan, China and Russia.

The department pledged to increase its strength in Guam by upping the number of naval and air force personnel and relocating Marine Corps functions there, in order to achieve a “posture that is more geographically distributed, operationally resilient, and politically sustainable.”

The Japanese and U.S. governments also agreed to move some 9,000 Marines out of Okinawa and transfer some of them to Guam starting in the early 2020s.

The previous QDR report, released in February 2010, showed increased U.S. vigilance over the growing military presence of China and pledged to transform U.S. forces to better deal with terrorism. The latest report suggests that, at least for now, concerns about China continue to weigh heavily on the minds of U.S. strategists in Asia.

[SSridhar]

China says 2014 military budget to rise 12.2% - Japan Times

China will increase military spending by 12.2 percent this year to 808.23 billion yuan ($131.57 billion), the government said on Wednesday, partly to beef up coastal and air defenses and to develop more high-tech weapons.

The government announced its spending plan for the 2.3 million-strong People’s Liberation Army (PLA) at the opening of parliament’s annual meeting. The increase builds on a nearly unbroken run of double-digit hikes in the defense budget for the past two decades.

“We will comprehensively enhance the revolutionary nature of the Chinese armed forces, further modernize them and upgrade their performance, and continue to raise their deterrence and combat capabilities in the information age,” Premier Li Keqiang told the largely rubber-stamp legislature.

Li added that China would “strengthen research on national defense and the development of new- and high-technology weapons and equipment” and “enhance border, coastal and air defenses.”

China’s military spending is now second only to that of the United States, allowing Beijing to create a modern force that is projecting power deep into the disputed waters of the East and South China seas.

Much military spending takes place outside the budget, however, and many experts estimate real outlays are closer to $200 billion. The U.S. Defense Department’s base budget for fiscal 2014 is $526.8 billion.

At a time when Washington has stepped up its military presence in the region as part of a strategic “pivot” toward Asia, China is building new submarines, surface ships and anti-ship ballistic missiles, and has tested emerging technology aimed at destroying missiles in midair.

It carried out the first test flight of a stealth fighter jet in 2011 and has put a refurbished aircraft carrier to sea.

Nevertheless, experts say it could be decades before China’s military is a match for America’s armed forces.

David Helvey, U.S. deputy assistant secretary of defense for East Asia, told a U.S. Senate committee hearing on Tuesday that the Pentagon was seeking to build “healthy” ties with China’s military, but said Beijing needed to be more transparent about its armed forces buildup.

“We remain concerned about a lack of transparency regarding China’s growing military and its increasingly assertive behavior in the maritime domain,” Helvey said.

China has repeatedly said the world has nothing to fear from its military spending, which it says is needed for legitimate defensive purposes.

Its neighbors, however, have become increasingly nervous about Beijing’s expanding military, and the latest double-digit rise could reinforce disquiet in the region.

China and Japan have locked horns over uninhabited rocky islands each claims in the East China Sea.

Beijing also claims 90 percent of the 3.5 million sq. km South China Sea, which is believed to be rich in oil and gas. The Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan claim parts of those waters.

The United States last month said it was concerned that China’s maritime claims in the South China Sea were an effort to gain creeping control of oceans in the Asia-Pacific region.

[SSridhar]

Kunming attacks may signal wider troubles - Japan Times

A brazen and bloody machete attack at a Chinese railway station could herald an ominous change in the violence Beijing blames on separatists from Xinjiang, analysts say, threatening more incidents far beyond the restive region.

Until now, disturbances have largely been confined to Xinjiang, a vast resource-rich area in far western China, and focused on symbols of the Chinese state, such as police.

But the scale, location, nature and timing of the Kunming mayhem potentially points to a change in mindset with the overt targeting of civilians — whoever was behind it.

Beijing immediately labeled the incident as terrorism, and Washington followed suit on Monday after initially referring to it as a “tragedy,” in language that drew angry accusations of double standards on Chinese social media.

“You can’t class this attack as other than a terrorist attack,” Michael Clarke, an expert on Xinjiang at the Griffith Asia Institute in Brisbane, Australia, said, adding that it was designed to “induce fear amongst the Chinese populace.”

Xinjiang is home to Uighurs and other ethnic minorities with strong cultural and historical links to neighboring Central Asian states such as Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan. It has seen regular clashes for much of the past year.

Uighurs resent decades of immigration by China’s ethnic Han majority they say has brought economic inequality and discrimination in education and religious affairs, such as a campaign to stop the Muslim practice of women covering their faces.

China counters that it plays a positive role and has brought about development and improvements to health and living standards.

Deadly incidents as reported in state media and by exile groups often center on violence between Uighurs and local police and security authorities, with both sides trading accusations over who is to blame.

But Saturday’s bloodshed in the southwestern city of Kunming, where knife- and machete-wielding attackers clad in black killed 29 people and wounded 143, stands out for its brutality and targeting, analysts say.

“It must have taken a lot of planning and involved the recruitment of a large number of attackers who assumed most would die,” said Gardner Bovingdon, an expert on the history and politics of Xinjiang at Indiana University.

Police captured three suspects on Monday, the Ministry of Public Security said, adding that eight people were involved in all, four shot dead and a wounded woman arrested at the scene.

State media were quick to point the finger at “Xinjiang separatists,” code for Uighurs, the largest single group in Xinjiang.

Some analysts outside mainland China, however, are wary of such assertions until hard evidence emerges, given the state’s overwhelming control of domestic information and media.

Clarke said that if eventually proven, it “really signals a new level in development in terms of the conflict there, in a sense spreading the struggle from Xinjiang basically to the rest of China. And that has to be concerning for the Communist Party moving forward.”

Beijing regularly accuses what it says are exiled Uighur separatist groups such as the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM) and the Turkestan Islamic Party (TIP) as being behind terrorism.

The U.S.-based SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors extremist groups, said in November that in a video posted online by TIP leader Abdullah Mansour described a fiery vehicle crash on Beijing’s Tiananmen Square as a “jihadi operation” and the perpetrators “mujahedeen.”

He warned Uighur fighters would target the Great Hall of the People in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square, where the ruling Communist Party holds key meetings such as this week’s annual session of China’s rubber-stamp legislature.

“The Kunming attack is either ETIM-led or ETIM-inspired,” said Rohan Gunaratna, professor of security studies at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, describing it as the military wing of the TIP and the only group with the ability to conduct or instigate such an assault.

But other experts doubt the strength of the groups and their links to global terrorism, with some arguing China exaggerates the threat to justify tough security measures in Xinjiang.

The shadowy nature of the alleged Uighur extremists also means there is a lack of hard information on their numbers, location and capabilities.

“I remain unconvinced that ETIM has survived as an influential organization these last years,” Bovingdon said. “Beijing constantly adverts to it precisely because the U.S. once identified ETIM as a terrorist organization.”

He also expressed doubts that the TIP, seen by some as ETIM’s successor, has any influence.

“All the evidence I’ve seen thus far tells us no more than that some bearded Uighur speakers armed with weapons and a smattering of Islamic learning can make videos,” he said.

Chung Chien-peng, professor of political science at Lingnan University in Hong Kong, cautioned it is too early to say who was responsible for Kunming.

But it had “shock value,” he said, and “desperation or . . . frustration” may prove to be the cause.

The latest assault will not be the last, Gunaratna believes.

“The Kunming attack is a natural progression of violence that we have witnessed in Xinjiang,” he said.

“It’s a low-cost, high-impact attack and a long-range attack. And this kind of attack sends a very clear message to China. They will strike again, they will strike outside Xinjiang.”

[SSridhar]

Crackdown after China's 9/11 could add fuel to fire in Xinjiang - Japan Times

Beijing is vowing to strike back against an unprecedented mass killing of civilians by alleged Xinjiang militants far outside their homeland, but analysts say that may merely speed up the cycle of repression and violent reprisal.

A black-clad gang of more than 10 people killed at least 29 and injured more than 140 in a stabbing spree at Kunming railway station in southwestern Yunnan province late Saturday.

China’s top security official was quickly dispatched and urged “forcible measures to crack down on violent terrorism activities,” the official Xinhua News Agency said, as the public shared horror and anger at photos of bloodied bodies scattered across the floor.

Although knife and bomb attacks occur periodically in Xinjiang, where China’s mostly Muslim Uighur minority is concentrated, they have rarely captured the same attention as this first large-scale killing outside the remote region.

The incident could severely harden popular and official opinion on Xinjiang — and provoke fresh outrage as a result, said Shan Wei, a political scientist at the National University of Singapore’s East Asian Institute.

“The psychological impact of this on the Chinese general public will be enormous,” Shan said, adding that it will make people “more supportive of hard-line policies by the government.

“It gives the Chinese government a very strong reason to step up its hard-line policies on the Xinjiang or Uighur issue,” he added.

In an English-language commentary Sunday, Xinhua journalist Gui Tao called the assault China’s “9/11,” a reference to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Analysts say leaders may also feel the rampage leaves them less open to criticism often directed at Beijing’s Xinjiang policies.

Rights groups accuse China of cultural repression and discrimination in the resource-rich region. And Western analysts have tended to discount Beijing’s claim to be a victim of global jihad, saying it exaggerates the threat as a pretext to crack down on Uighurs.

“The problem in China is that there’s no mechanism for people who think they are victims of discrimination to seek redress,” said Willy Lam, a professor at the Center for China Studies at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. “There is no dialogue between the authorities and those with grievances, so they resort to violence, and from official reports it appears the frequency and intensity of those outbursts is increasing.”

The Kunming attack came despite Beijing pushing a drive to develop Xinjiang after riots between Uighurs and ethnic majority Han left 200 people dead in the capital of Urumqi in 2009. The following year it began encouraging investment and subsidies in the area and enhancing preferential policies toward minorities.

Xinjiang saw 11.1 percent economic growth in 2013, surpassing the national rate of 7.7 percent.

But, said Shan: “You cannot expect that this problem can be resolved within a few years. You have to keep it up for maybe one decade, two decades.”

[member_28440]

Chinese Military Sabotage India’s State Owned Telco BSNL’s Base Station

The Office of National Counter-Intelligence anticipates that China and Russia will remain aggressive and capable collectors of sensitive US economic information and technologies, particularly in cyberspace. Both will almost certainly continue to deploy significant resources and a wide array of tactics to acquire this information from US sources, motivated by the desire to achieve economic, strategic, and military parity with the United States.

China will continue to be driven by its longstanding policy of “catching up fast and surpassing” Western powers. An emblematic program in this drive is Project 863, which provides funding and guidance for efforts to clandestinely acquire US technology and sensitive economic information. The project was launched in 1986 to enhance China’s economic competitiveness and narrow the science and technology gap between China and the West in areas such as Nanotechnology, Computers, and Biotechnology.

Among the products known to have resulted from the 863 program are the Loongson Computer Processor family (originally named Godson) and the Shenzhou Spacecraft.

India’s NSC said that as per Intelligence Bureau reports, Chinese vendors such as Huawei and ZTE were part of a Chinese Army project called PLA-863. “As per this programme, Huawei was mandated to focus on switches and routers, ZTE on mobile and fibre networks, Julong on switchboards and Legend on computers with the objective of dominating world telecom scene and strengthening its electronic warfare capabilities,” the National Security Council Secretariat said in an April 15 report that was reviewed by ET.

The program initially focused on seven key technological fields:

Biotechnology

Space

Information technology

Laser technology

Automation

Energy

New materials

Since 1986, two more fields have been brought under the umbrella of the program:

Telecommunications (1992)

Marine technology (1996)

Under the plan, about US $200 billion was to be spent on information and communication technologies, of which US $150 billion was earmarked for telecommunications.