OBOR, Chinese Strategy and Implications

[shiv]

^^+1

Most of these media commentators who are "research fellows" simply blurt some shit because they are supposed to say something. I honestly suspect their credentials. I have see some seriously ill informed and under researched articles - pooping poop picked up from someone eles's useless non researched opinion piece.

[chanakyaa]

Looks like that the psychological impact of media hokus pokus around Chinese propagated (and silently supported by the West) empty marketing called "OBOR" "Silk Road" "BRI" etc. has taken some serious toll on the psyche of some Indians. Who gives a F* to uncle, let alone its U-turn...

Trump administration hails US-China trade deal

China will open its market to US credit rating agencies and credit card companies as well as resume imports of US beef, part of a package hailed by the Trump administration as the first step in redefining the trade relationship between the world’s two largest economies.

The 10-point package revealed on Friday was billed as an “early harvest” from the 100-day plan to reset the trade relationship that President Donald Trump and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping agreed to pursue when they met in April. It also saw the Trump administration offer its tacit endorsement of one of Mr Xi’s pet projects: Beijing’s vast plan to revive the ancient “Silk Road” to Europe, which many in Washington have in recent years viewed as a Chinese effort to counter US strategic influence in Asia.
...(more)

[shiv]

Cnn has a front pager on cpec bring 40.000 expats to tsp and developing love between deep friends.

You know the building mafia of Bengaluru as well as I do. You can imagine the magnitude of the vested interests in the construction business in China sitting in the CCP. If profitable government funded building projects in China are drying up the next step is to apply the workers and capability in turd world nations and put them in debt for 99 years.

This is less of a direct threat to India and more of a threat to western consulting companies who are used to a steady inflow of infra projects with loans from western banks.

In corrupt dictactorships/wahhabi sultanates - land needed for ports and highways will simply be grabbed from the poor like the CCP did in China. That_will_not_ happen in India. Yes it causes delays but it is better in the long term

[manjgu]

shiv..i will tell u what is the security implication.a) tomorrow with CPEC in place... chinese companies ( and people) heavily invested in Pakistan/POK ..chinese warships berthed in paki ports..and prowling in indian ocean..would india have the gumption to start a shooting war with NaPakis with possible chinese casualties/loss b) a growing chinese economy aids and abets our mortal enemy..Pakistan.. to be the cats paw against India. some authors have noted the current Paki belligerence to increasing chinese influence. c) the usage of ports in sri lanka, pakistan, etc increases the combat potential of chinese navy. ( these are some of the security implications). Its not about being slaves of western powers is better than being chinese slaves.. the first one was bad and we have to ensure the 2nd one does not happen. Shiv ..my gripe is we have not been able to manage the immediate neighbourhood ie Nepal..Bdesh..SL..Afghanistan and ofc Pakistan. There is no national vision except on how to win next MCD, State elections

[manjgu]

my gripe is not so much as to what China is doing..but what India is not doing. Our counter to China in SL is to start a flight between colombo and varanasi !!! BD had to seek chinese navy to train on subs !! nepal the less said the better... Have we even built a good road connecting Mayanmar , Thailand..and far east..which could be our own OBOR ( desi one) . forget that ..have we even built a good road connecting the north east to India !!!

[KL Dubey]

I think some people are getting spooked by random media reports and statements from various mofussil "academics". India has never had so much going for it than it does now. We need to focus and not get distracted by these Chinese schemes. What we need is cooperation with technologically advanced nations - there is little to be gained by partnering with China, which really doesn't have anything to offer.

I think the fundamental issue is that we have not consolidated the state of J&K. At some point soon we will have to launch a military offensive to take back POK and simultaneously neutralize Pawkee interests in the Srinagar valley. If we can do this, all the other insecurities will disappear by themselves.

[pankajs]

^
Agree with the first part. Folks need to take a broader view of things. Trying to match China dollar for dollar is not an option.

[manjgu]

KL Dubey...the so called technologically advanced countries ( USA..France..USSR ..have phuked us enough and continuing to do so...check the rafales...su 30 spares etc..the stories are endless). what we need is our own effort..no one parts with technology.

[abhijatT]

Some random thoughts .

Chinese are only "building" infrastructure i.e Roads , Ports , Power plants etc.

If we for now ignore the MSR part , then almost all route pass through difficult geographical terrains , Central Asia or CPEC , so not only initial cost is high but maintenance cost would be high too.

More so , to make these infrastructure running, you need economic interest in form of industries and consumers well established along these routes. For that to happen , basic requirement of Human resource development is required.

So , how many countries, through which Land component of this project passes , can be said to be good in HDI ?

Also, many of these countries have autocratic regime with sharp ethnic divisions , so benefit of said project would be digested by few in power , so what would others do ? I foresee rise in more revolution and militancy in these regions as the said project may bring economic benefit to few , but would eventually create struggle within these countries as each group would try to take larger piece of pie and their polity may not allow them to do so peacefully.

They are creating a mess , which would eventually benefit American dream of fracture in Eurasia .

[shiv]

shiv..i will tell u what is the security implication.a) tomorrow with CPEC in place... chinese companies ( and people) heavily invested in Pakistan/POK ..chinese warships berthed in paki ports..and prowling in indian ocean..would india have the gumption to start a shooting war with NaPakis with possible chinese casualties/loss b) a growing chinese economy aids and abets our mortal enemy..Pakistan.. to be the cats paw against India. some authors have noted the current Paki belligerence to increasing chinese influence. c) the usage of ports in sri lanka, pakistan, etc increases the combat potential of chinese navy. ( these are some of the security implications). Its not about being slaves of western powers is better than being chinese slaves.. the first one was bad and we have to ensure the 2nd one does not happen. Shiv ..my gripe is we have not been able to manage the immediate neighbourhood ie Nepal..Bdesh..SL..Afghanistan and ofc Pakistan. There is no national vision except on how to win next MCD, State elections

I would describe this as a blinkered viewpoint - and the sort of viewpoint that one would expect from a person who is China obsessed but totally blind to the actions of the US and other "superpowers"

You accuse India of "not managing its neighbourhood". If you think about it. China has not managed its neighbourhood either, but I digress.

The US has done everything to Pakistan that you say that the Chinese will do. Where did it get them? Heck the US even had bases in Pakistan, sent experts to help them in conflicts, gave them intel reports about Indian movements and sent a fleet against us. It got them nowhere. To an extent, we saw the US off. So your fears about China and laments about India are exaggerated and underinformed. Pakistan cannot be handled in isolation. The US has helped Pakistan and is now gradually fading from that role. China too has helped them but militarily I think China is a smaller threat which we can handle with Pakistan. Chinas logistic lines whether by land or by sea are long and I think you are over-afraid. Before I get tempted to use the expression that I normally use for such an overly anxious feeling about China with utter blindness to other inputs - I will remove myself from this particular discussion with you. I cannot ask you to change but my own perspective is 180 degrees away from yours. With that I am going to try and stay away from discussing India vs/China/Pakistan with you on this thread.

[shiv]

So , how many countries, through which Land component of this project passes , can be said to be good in HDI ?

Also, many of these countries have autocratic regime with sharp ethnic divisions , so benefit of said project would be digested by few in power , so what would others do ? I foresee rise in more revolution and militancy in these regions as the said project may bring economic benefit to few , but would eventually create struggle within these countries as each group would try to take larger piece of pie and their polity may not allow them to do so peacefully.

Interesting perspective

If you think about it - every square meter of land on earth is previosuly owned and occupied by somebody or the other. Typically in low HDI countries the land is agricultural or fallow supporting only hand to mouth. Or it could be fertile as well - but it is pre-owned. All "infrastructure work" like roads involve expansion of land usage. A 2 lane highway will need huge tracts of extra land. That land will have to be grabbed from someone.

For example in Bengaluru land acquisition for the Metro project has been a headache. In Gujarat a fairly attractive land acquisition model was arrived at for infrastructure. In China peasants were simply kicked out. Even now on Google Earth you can see broken down old villages with new uncharacteristic developments nearby. Now once this kicking out starts happening in 3rd world nations there will be a mess. Already - farmers in Sri Lanka are telling the government to fukoff - they will not give up the 15,000 acres that the previous government pledged to China. The same is true in Baluchistan

So the "success" of this project may not be the aim of the Chinese - the Chinese aim is simply to keep their construction companies engaged - while paying their own companies with bank funds from a Chinese bank. That bank then collects money from the client nation over 100 years. As long as prosperity of the building companies is assured the Chinese do not give a rats ass about real trade other than the stuff they may be able to export + energy to import. If a country has no money for imports and no oil for export it will simply be repaying China with debts for 100 years. Guess what we are doing for western banks? Same thing

If the client nation has civil war because of the mess - the Chinese won't care. The corrupt leaders will make a packet and pay off the Chinese and the people will be screwed. This is not a model that India is going to follow no matter how much we admire the Chinese and shiver in our dhotis. We only need to make sure that the road going through Indian territory (Gilgit) is sabotaged or stopped.

[abhijatT]

Shiv ji , thank you for reply and I agree with you completely.

So , what I could understand from your post is that , these countries of Central Asia would politically be tending towards more autocratic rule , to repay the debt by high taxation on their people , and thus fragmenting the society more.

Also, as the only viable "industry" in these regions can be raw mineral exporting industries , as lack of water resource make other industries unviable , and for that an autocratic, or better dictatorship based regime is more favorable to Chinese interest , so do you foresee rise of dictatorship(proxy of Chinese) in these regions ?


Another point I want to ask , do you see in foreseeable future chinese deploying their troops in these regions to support their proxy leaders , and protecting their debt ?

So, in background of this , what you think should be India's response ? I for one think that , what our country is doing as of now ,by providing services like tele-medicine , education , hospital equipment and other basic requirement to develop human resources and, also keeping our cultural ties, thus cultivating future leaders in these regions who would eventually lead to resistance against chinese proxies is right strategy as of now.

[manjgu]

shiv..we can agree to disagree.. i think u did not get my point. i was implying ..handling Pakistan will get increasingly complicated with a functioning OBOR ( CPEC) and increasing chinese presence in POK. India will have to contend with more variables. Nature of US involvement was of a different nature essentially military than chinese involvement with Pakistan which is both military and economic.

[Deans]

Technically we could do to India what Pakistan and Sri Lanka and African nations did. We could invite the Chinese to build roads and telecom facilities and power plants all over India using Chinese money and labour while we boast that we are rapidly improving our infrastructure with Chinese aid. Why don't we do that? A

One useful thing we are doing, though not as part of some grand strategy, is buy Chinese PV cells for Solar power. These are heavily subsidised
by the Chinese. Even if they were not, our players do not have the scale to mass manufacture and drive down costs. Purchases from China have resulted in the cost of Solar power (@ just over Rs 3 /unit) for the first time being cheaper than power from new thermal plants.

We need to selectively purchase those items from China that can have a multiplier effect on our economy AND are subsidised by China (effectively the Chinese pay for our development). On other items, rather than an anti-dumping duty ( which will be against WTO norms and will invite retaliation),set a floor price at which duties will be assessed. The problem with cheap Chinese goods is not low import duties, but under invoicing of imports - with black money taken out of India, being separately sent to China, to make up the difference in invoiced and real price).

On OBOR, we could call the Chinese bluff and invite them to construct grand rail lines/roads in Arunachal or Leh, with their money and our
labor.

[rsingh]

About CPEC and other crap , what is going to stop TSB to stop paying? They can easily say "Hu are youi" and start milking panda.panda being very sensitive about H&D, will comply.

[chola]

I am not sure if there is a mild racist attitude in our (Indian) minds or whether it is a sepoy mentality that makes us fearful of China while we have hardly complained about the way the west has messed with us while they dominate the system.

What is there to be not sure of? That sepoy mentality is front and center in our every reaction to the lizard.

Had Cheen never taken off, we would have been happy to remain where we were in a world dominated by goras. We were perfectly accepting of our place on the bottom of the totem pole even as Japan rose.

But the rise of PRC over the past decades threw a spanner into our cosy acceptance of a world hierarchy set in place since the Brit occupation.

Without the visceral hatred and, yes, racism shown to the chinis after 1962, we might not have risen in conjunction.

In the space of my life time, I saw us transforming from a global image of the India of Mother Teresa to that of Modi (who publicly followed a chini model in Gujarat.)

For that I am grateful for Cheen.

China has a grandiose plan to employ Chinese to build infrastructure around the world. Why does that worry us? Because they are not democratic? Because they don't have "freedom"? Because of this we were very happy to see Western companies build bullshit like Burj Khalifa in Dubai and fancy airports in turd-world nations, Motorways in Pakistan etc but we are scared of what China is doing? And we are happy to use the financial markets of the west where money can be parked with anonymity and no accountability. We have kowtowed to the west since before 1947 and what is this sudden fear that we will have to kowtow to someone else?

You already gave the main answer to this question: sepoy mentality. Gora domination we had been comfortable with for centuries.

But the remainder of the answer is 1962. Were it not for this, we might have remained in stupor during Cheen's challenge to goras -- like we did during Japan's rise.

I can't understand what there is to "compete with China". We have to compete with ourselves.

There is nothing wrong with competing with Cheen. Chini-Indi equal equal means global. Paki-Indi means South Asia straitjacket.

Just compete maturely and intelligently. This we have not been able to do. Partly because of a sepoy mentality and 1962.

Take Japan and Cheen. Jap fighters scramble about 800 times every year over chini aircraft intrusions. Pictures of encounters with J-11s, J-10s, Y-8s, etc. all over the internet.

You cannot find a single picture of chini-yindoo aerial engagement anywhere. Sure, we have a video or two of IA and chinis pushing each other. But I dare say the border with Cheen is fairly quiet with very little equipment in confrontation.

Hostility between PRC and Japan is far more volatile than chini-yindoo. Yet, PRC-Japan trade, tourism, etc. is wide and deep and enriches both. The same could be said of the PRC's relationship with US, SoKo and Taiwan.

Now, Cheen has taken on a global vision in OBOR. And again all of its perceived rivals in the East are at the table. Where should we be?

Do we take a mature approach similar to that of Japan or we continue as always?

[Kashi]

Hostility between PRC and Japan is far more volatile than chini-yindoo. Yet, PRC-Japan trade, tourism, etc. is wide and deep and enriches both. The same could be said of the PRC's relationship with US, SoKo and Taiwan.

Have you spoken to any Japanese or Taiwanese about that?

Now, Cheen has taken on a global vision in OBOR. And again all of its perceived rivals in the East are at the table. Where should we be?

Do we take a mature approach similar to that of Japan or we continue as always?

For all this talk of "tak[ing] a mature approach"

First of all we are not the ones who are
a. Occupying Chinese territory,
b. Claiming large tracts of Chinese territory and threatening to occupy them and "teach them a lesson"
c. Arming a volatile psychotic nation to teeth to keep China on their toes
d. Arming and hosting insurgent groups in China.

Secondly, Japan, SoKo and Taiwan are under the US defensive umbrella. US has made it clear at all times, even recently when the Cheeni drama over Air defense zone and Senkaku islands happened.

[shiv]

Another point I want to ask , do you see in foreseeable future chinese deploying their troops in these regions to support their proxy leaders , and protecting their debt ?

The expression "deploying troops" is as unhelpful an expression as "security threat". Unfortunately I feel a bout of uncontrollable verbal diarrhoea rushing to come out when I say that.

Right from the days of Hannibal, Al Sikandar and other raiders - "deploying troops" means armed men/armies going from their normal/home territories to foreign lands. En route - back in those days the men had to eat - so they either bought or transported food or got it from friendly villages or simply raided them. Eventually in the foreign land where troops were "deployed" they would either loot and return or stay there. Staying there meant that they would have to get food and water locally - which would be possible if local people were friendly. If not there would be attacks and sooner or later they would either have to start killing locals or vacate.

The British were the world's best "troop deployers". They had troops to deploy but they went as traders and won local friends and set up bases. So if you want to "deploy troops" to foreign lands your best bet is to make friends with the locals and have a military base so you can get food water and other supplies.

China actually has hostile military bases in Tibet and Xinjiang. In Tibet where food is in short supply - China imports food from the East. The US is different - they have - since WW2 developed a string of allies by pouring in money and keeping the locals happy.The US is able to act globally via its air logistics and available bases. There are US bases in the UK and Germany, in Diego Garcia and probably in Saudi Arabia as well. Then Okinawa, Korea, Hawaii etc. The US has friendly bases for food, recreation etc every 3000-5000 km anywhere in the world. That is essential for force projection. But still when the US has tried to use force to support useless despots they have botched it badly like Shah of Iran, Marcos of Philippines and Vietnam.

So yes the Chinese may "deploy troops". But without local support those deployed troops will have to watch their own asses. Local support will depend on whether the Chinese are benefiting the local population or whether they are skimming wealth. Even in Shitistan Chinese troops will be looking out for their own asses - not augmenting Paki ability and in nay case their lines are really long whether it is by sea or by land. I would not worry about China "deploying troops" as long as we continue to build up our own forces. We are not weak by any means and too much dhoti-shivering on the part of some Indians is counter productive in more ways than one. Apart from the despondency that sets in from needless pant-browning by Indians it also makes the Chinese more brazen and arrogant.

The Chinese need to be dealt with with arrogance and confidence not pant wetting and respect. They will learn to notice us the day the majority of Indians in articles and the media stop dhoti shivering and speaking with assurance like the zero-Pakis do with nothing in their heads, hands or stomachs. Unfortunately Indians waste all their effort in either being scared of the Chinese or demanding that other Indians should show them respect. That is totally wrong on many counts.

[Bhurishravas]

Hostility between PRC and Japan is far more volatile than chini-yindoo. Yet, PRC-Japan trade, tourism, etc. is wide and deep and enriches both.

So thought the japanese and are now scrambling to diversify their investments. Giving all technology to Cheenis and getting nice threats in return.
The western countries are much smarter and invest more strategically. And also back it up with politicao-military power.

[Singha]

Take a look at @deSyracuse's Tweet: https://twitter.com/deSyracuse/status/8 ... 83712?s=09

[chola]

Hostility between PRC and Japan is far more volatile than chini-yindoo. Yet, PRC-Japan trade, tourism, etc. is wide and deep and enriches both. The same could be said of the PRC's relationship with US, SoKo and Taiwan.

Have you spoken to any Japanese or Taiwanese about that?

Which ones? The ones involved in the chini tourism trade both or the ones involved in sending manufacturing goods to chiniland? All you need to do is check their trade and tourism levels.

Now, Cheen has taken on a global vision in OBOR. And again all of its perceived rivals in the East are at the table. Where should we be?

Do we take a mature approach similar to that of Japan or we continue as always?

For all this talk of "tak[ing] a mature approach"

First of all we are not the ones who are
a. Occupying Chinese territory,
b. Claiming large tracts of Chinese territory and threatening to occupy them and "teach them a lesson"
c. Arming a volatile psychotic nation to teeth to keep China on their toes
d. Arming and hosting insurgent groups in China.

Secondly, Japan, SoKo and Taiwan are under the US defensive umbrella. US has made it clear at all times, even recently when the Cheeni drama over Air defense zone and Senkaku islands happened.

How is that any greater than chini-jap or chini-unkil relations? PRC claims that Japan occupies the Senkukus and Unkil is arming Japan (who PRC sees as killing millions.). And yet PRC would never be in the position to launch OBOR if it had not engaged in deep relationships with the US and Japan.

As far as the defensive umbrella, we are under our OWN umbrella which should make us more confident to engage.

Being under the US Umbrella, should have made engagement with chini much harder since you depend on making Unkil happy which is what they do with Unkil enemies like NoKo, Iran and to a great extent, Russia.

With China, they are all in. Why? A large part of it has to do with the chinis themselves.

In spite of US bases all around them, they went into the deepest and broadest relationship possible with the United States.

[Singha]

Roads and rails into car might plan to make xinjiang and tibet economically viable for population explosion thru migrant worker manufacturing cities. This will also complete the demographic takeover of hans vs locals.

[Singha]

We are around year10 of the boom in chinese students going to study ug and pg in massa. Millions would have returned to homeland after completing. Has anyone tracked how these western educated kids of the elites are faring now?

[chola]

We are around year10 of the boom in chinese students going to study ug and pg in massa. Millions would have returned to homeland after completing. Has anyone tracked how these western educated kids of the elites are faring now?

A large percentage of them have residency in the US, including Eleven's daughter. They lead a tsunami of chini money across the US. They are hired into the US F-500.

Chimerica.

Like the Chimera, a mythical multi-headed beast of epic proportions. Ugly as sin though.

Without the US and its allies in the Far East, China would NEVER have built its printing press and OBOR would never have been conceived without it.

Chini worships Unkil even it as it competes with them. From driving on the right lane to aircraft carriers, it copies the US. OBOR is American in scope and vision.

[Singha]

Usa might think obor cpec will pacify peking and ruling the eurasian steppe and arab world will turn its focus to land...letting usa continue to rule the east asian seas...

If wishes were horses.

[chola]

Usa might think obor cpec will pacify peking and ruling the eurasian steppe and arab world will turn its focus to land...letting usa continue to rule the east asian seas...

If wishes were horses.

Not true, American doctrine had been to keep any single power from dominating the Eurasian landmass. It didn't matter if it were Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan or Soviet Russia. That has not changed with China.

The US is biding its time on OBOR. All they need is a chini mis-step anywhere to collapse this thing. But in the meantime, why not take advantage of it? Infrastructure, as I said many times before, is high risk low return. If the PRC wants to build it then let them. American companies will pounce either during the building phase or after.

But Cheen is different ftom past Eurasian powers in that is a pathetically weak military power but immensely strong on the economic size. The US might not be able to engage militarily and kinetically with a wet noodle. So without an excuse for a fight the chinis might jyst end up dominating Eurasia as a soft, non-military power that depends on economics to dominate.

This where we could come in. A nice short war with the chini army and its fat mushy little emperors would be fun and profitable.

[shiv]

Roads and rails into car might plan to make xinjiang and tibet economically viable for population explosion thru migrant worker manufacturing cities. This will also complete the demographic takeover of hans vs locals.

Not Tibet. The geography is too hostile. There is no friggin oxygen.

Xinjiang is dry and Takla Makan next door does not help. These areas cannot be populated by technology unless supplies are brought in from 1000s of km away and that makes it economicallly unviable.

[shiv]

Take a look at @deSyracuse's Tweet: https://twitter.com/deSyracuse/status/8 ... 83712?s=09

Unfortunatement je ne talkez or understandez pas Francais

[Singha]

The map has english ..gives a glimpse of the dlagons plans

While xinjiang and Tibet are tough places to put roots in...once they start paying for themselves via exports into obor and cpec..building a few new cities is not a issue for cheen..lots of land..and lots of hungry hordes willing to make a new life...if ppl can go to mozambique and congo to open noodle shop for cheen workers this is not far...

There are even readymade ghost cities like ordos in inner mongolia that can house ppl willing to anchor the new silk routes

Peking is thinking a 30yr investment before roi on this axis. We are 5 to 10yrs into it. By then it plans to rule the steppe upto turkey and balkans and have a deep hold on arabia africa and southern european piigs nations.

America is superbly ready for the military wars of old but unready for this new hybrid war backed by low cost capital, vendor financing and alliance with local elites. Consider for example cheen telecom nd power eqpt sales into india and alubaba investments. Lot of countries are on lookout for low cost capital to develop incl india.

[Singha]

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/02/m ... gle.co.in/

[shiv]

The map has english ..gives a glimpse of the dlagons plans

While xinjiang and Tibet are tough places to put roots in...once they start paying for themselves via exports into obor and cpec.

OBOR road route bypasses both Tibet and Takla Makan desert and runs north. Google for any OBOR map. There is a reason for that. You can build roads that go through permafrost mountains and plains at 5000 meters but you can't get drivers to use that route because it is so hostile. And you can't maintain truck stops and recreation and rest areas or even have continuous road monitoring and truck services. Overall sea routes will be cheaper than going via Tibet ot Takla Makan

[r_subra]

OBOR is China's main geopolitical strategy to gain numero uno status w/o fighting a global war with US. Global hegemony is realized thru (a) ability to set ground rules for global economic activity/trade and (b) project military power globally. While china is on course to be global military power in about 20 years, things are much more difficult on the economic front. China has to replace the US dollar as reserve currency with the reminbi to gain rule making status. But China has 3+ trillion of USD reserves. How to do this? OBOR is the way.

Phase I
a. Invest billions in OBOR infrastructure regardless of risk with sovereign guarantees by Chinese led financial institutions. Chinese companies / labor / steel / cement production can all be utilized... kicker is commodity rich nations like Oz, african / SA nations are grateful to china.
b. Terms of OBOR loan agreements are intended to cause indebtness of the host country. In addition, they will dump cheap goods in these nations to maintain trade deficits. They are careful to include nations with large untapped petroleum resources.
c. China becomes the defacto economic CG of Europe, Africa & Asia. In addition, main arteries of OBOR are far away from USN naval reach.
d. Strategic alliance with Russia (a global military, oil power) against US is absolutely critical for this to work.

Phase II
a. As countries default, China may take territory, natural resources, food products in lieu of debt repayments
b. When there is a critical mass of defaults, china will agree to reasonable if trade is switched to reminbi.

Once USD is replaced as global reserve currency, it is curtains for the US. But a #3 economy like India can throw spanner into this if it agrees to stick with the dollar....

The sheer scale of this strategy is breathtaking!

[A_Gupta]

As countries default, China may take territory, natural resources, food products in lieu of debt repayments.

Curious - when did that last happen, that a country defaulted and territory was taken?
http://www.economist.com/blogs/economis ... xplains-20

[Peregrine]

China road initiative is like a colonial enterprise: India

NEW DELHI: On the eve of China's biggest foreign policy manoeuvre in years, India on Saturday came out in open opposition against Beijing's One Belt, One Road forum, reminding it that no country could accept a project that ignores its core concerns on sovereignty and territorial integrity.

India has strong reservations over the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, a flagship project of the connectivity initiative that is expected to figure prominently in the two-day meet starting in Beijing on Sunday.

In a strongly-worded statement on the eve of the event, which will see participation of more than 60 countries, India escalated its opposition to OBOR, suggesting that the project is little more than a colonial enterprise, leaving debt and broken communities in its wake.

"We are of the firm belief that connectivity initiatives must be based on universally recognised international norms, good governance, rule of law, openness, transparency and equality. Connectivity initiatives must follow principles of financial responsibility to avoid projects that would create unsustainable debt burden for communities; balanced ecological and environmental protection and preservation standards; transparent assessment of project costs; and skill and technology transfer to help long term running and maintenance of the assets created by local communities.

Connectivity projects must be pursued in a manner that respects sovereignty and territorial integrity." Structural misalignments of OBOR have been detailed by observers and scholars.

Sri Lanka is a big example, where an unviable Hambantota port project has left Colombo reeling under $8 billion debt.

India's stance to sour ties between Modi & Xi

Like Sri Lanka, where an unviable Hambantota port project has left Colombo reeling under an $8 billion debt, Pakistan may be headed in the same direction; Laos is trying to renegotiate a railway project, Myanmar has asked for its own renegotiation; a Belgrade-Budapest railway line to be built by China is under investigation by the EU.

Chinese infrastructure projects in foreign countries are typically executed by state-owned enterprises, while financing programmes, which initially appear attractive, sour quickly.

India's criticism of the OBOR initiative comes even as the US, one of the last holdouts, confirmed its attendance at the forum.

The US team will be led by Matt Pottinger, a senior director in the White House. Japan, India's another strategic partner, is sending Toshihiro Nikai, head of ruling LDP and former PM Yukio Hatoyama.

Confirming that India had received an invitation to participate in the 6 separate forums that China was organising as part of the Belt and Road Forum, the MEA said, "We have been urging China to engage in a meaningful dialogue. We are awaiting a positive response from the Chinese side."

Officials said that even though India had repeatedly asked China for consultations on OBOR, there has been no response.
India's statement comes as wake up call for Xi Jinping and his biggest foreign policy outreach, and puts paid to any prospect of bilateral ties improving during the rest of Modi's tenure.

Xi has given this summit top billing, projecting himself as the world's latest globalisation guru at a time when the West appears to be in retreat.

Pointing out that enhancing physical connectivity should bring greater economic benefits to all in an equitable and balanced manner, the MEA said, "We are working with many countries and international institutions in support of physical and digital connectivity in our own immediate and near neighbourhood."

Citing examples, the MEA spokeperson said that under the 'Act East' policy, India are pursuing the Trilateral Highway project; under the 'Neighbourhood First' policy, we are developing multimodal linkages with Myanmar and Bangladesh; under 'Go West' strategy, we are engaging with Iran on Chabahar Port and with others in Central Asia on International North South Transport Corridor.

India's connectivity programmes, he said, were more collaborative, more in tune with the needs and capabilities of the smaller partner.

The Cabinet gave nod to India's accession to UN-led TIR Convention in March, which will give traders access to "fast, easy, reliable and hassle free international system for movement of goods by road or multi- modal means across territories." MEA stated this accession would happen soon. China signed on to TIR Convention in 2016.

Cheers

[chetak]

An interesting POV, china's quest for lebensraum has been touted for the first time.


Wahhabism, meet Han-ism: CPEC betokens China’s search for lebensraum in Pakistan and Pakistan occupied Kashmir.

Wahhabism, meet Han-ism: CPEC betokens China’s search for lebensraum in Pakistan and Pakistan occupied Kashmir.

May 12, 2017, Samir Saran

With Beijing elevating the One Belt, One Road (OBOR) initiative’s political visibility through a heads of government summit this week, India needs to craft a sharper policy position. Over the past two years, New Delhi waited and watched as China sought political buy-in from Asian powers for OBOR. India subtly communicated to China that a trans-regional project of this magnitude required wider consultation.
When Beijing chose to sidestep this request, India articulated concerns – at the highest level, no less – regarding its own sovereign claim on those regions of Jammu & Kashmir that the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) would traverse.

China’s wanton disregard for Indian sensitivities suggests the debate on OBOR’s economic potential is now academic. There cannot be any serious discussion on India joining or not joining OBOR unless New Delhi feels its political sovereignty – the very basis of governance – is respected by the project. Far from this, CPEC (the life and soul of OBOR) threatens India’s territorial integrity in a manner unseen since 1962.

China, through its economic corridor with Pakistan, has proposed a dramatic redrawing of demographic and geographic boundaries. It is undertaking an unabashed, confrontational and neo-colonial smash and grab in south Asia.
It is capturing key real estate in the wider region. Beijing is building islands in South China Sea, contesting territorial claims of neighbours in the East China Sea, and even aspires for greater control of the Malacca Straits. It has bankrolled its way to political supremacy in central Asia. It now seeks to build overtly economic but covertly military facilities and bases through the CPEC route – in Gwadar but also Gilgit-Baltistan.

Islamabad is willing to offer such stations in return for Beijing’s protection and money. The most obvious attempt is to engineer a political solution to the Kashmir dispute by changing “facts on the ground”.

If China managed to do this in the South China Sea by constructing entire islands in disputed waters, CPEC will create permanent or semi-permanent projects that will change the nature of the economy and society in Gilgit-Baltistan. The region will be swamped by Chinese and Punjabis who will exploit its location and pillage its civilisation for common benefit.

Not only would CPEC run roughshod over the sacred Panchsheel principle of “mutual respect”, it would also destroy any chance of a peaceful settlement of the Kashmir dispute. In effect, Pakistan and China are suggesting that it is conceivable Jammu & Kashmir (and Gilgit-Baltistan and presumably Ladakh) can be segregated into separate units that merit unique economic, political and military engagement.

CPEC also triggers concern that economic concessions by Pakistan will lead to ceding of territory, for which the 1963 Sino-Pakistani agreement is a precedent. Ironically, China’s involvement in economic activities in contested territories goes against the grain of its own policy on FTAs between Taiwan and third parties.
By investing in CPEC, the UK and EU are complicit in this design. In effect, European money is being used by China to limit Western political leverage in Asia, and assist Pakistan to continue to sponsor anti-India radicalism.

China’s hardline approach in Xinjiang province offers a clue to what CPEC could do to Gilgit-Baltistan. The 2000 census said while the native Uyghur Muslim population in Xinjiang remained the largest ethnic group at 48%, Han Chinese made up 40%. This was an astonishing turnaround from the overwhelming 90% majority Uyghurs enjoyed in the 1950s.

Han Chinese are said to dominate the province today, as they are economically better off and awarded the best jobs and highest positions. Uyghur culture and customs have been suppressed. There are restrictions on fasting during Ramzan, Muslim baby names are labelled “extremist” and even the length of beards is regulated.

Is Gilgit-Baltistan the next frontier for such demographic re-engineering? In 1974, Pakistan abolished a rule that prevented non-locals from buying land in Gilgit-Baltistan. This Shia-dominated region saw rampant Sunni expansionism and settlement of people from all over Pakistan. “As of January 2001, the old population ratio of 1:4 (non-locals to locals) had been transformed to 3:4,” suggests the South Asia Intelligence Review.

CPEC will make Gilgit-Baltistan the meeting ground for a volatile osmosis of two supremacist projects: Wahhabism and Han-ism. Both aim for complete social domination of communities. This would not only alter the region’s demographic composition but also reduce Gilgit-Baltistan to a tinderbox of ethnic, religious and sectarian conflict, with grave security consequences for south and central Asia.
And finally China’s brazen disregard for concerns of sovereignty cuts to the heart of its bilateral relationship with India, which had long been premised on respect for principles of non-intervention, territorial integrity and peaceful resolution of disputes. If that basis no longer holds, Indian policy makers must seriously revisit the benefits of joining China-led multilateral initiatives. Some would even question the political viability of Brics going forward.

CPEC will create domestic pressures on India to incubate sub-conventional support for oppressed peoples in Gilgit, Tibet, Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia. It could intervene more directly in highlighting such issues in Balochistan, another CPEC waystation. While India’s $2.5 trillion economy brings limitations to any response, these steps will act as a benchmark for the future.

For now, India may resist the race to the bottom, ie confront violations of sovereignty with proportionate counter-violations. But policy planners in Beijing should not test India’s ability to impose Himalayan hurdles on the belt and road.

[rsingh]

Chinese plan was according to book. Defeat rival before war. India has showed that we have better books.way to go GOI. People will give example of Indian act. This is how a democracy protects it's sovereignty.

[mahaperu]

Article in Frobes about Wade Shephard's view of the Silk Road

https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepar ... 8a0a5b2027

I believe his last observation seems relevant. I do think there will be many hickups on the way such as happen even in small sized projects. But, 25-30 years from now these may seem all minor drawbacks in a big overall strategy.

[SSridhar]

China an economic giant, can’t ignore OBOR: Nepal - Sachin Parashar, ToI

Justifying its decision to join China's "One Belt, One Road" project despite India opposition, Nepal said on Saturday it could not ignore China as the latter was not just an economic powerhouse but also its neighbour.

Talking to TOI, Nepal's envoy to India Deep Kumar Upadhyaya said New Delhi's reservations to OBOR were mostly about China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. "Nepal will never give India grief but it cannot remain indifferent to a big economic power like China as it seeks more foreign investment and development," said Upadhyaya.

India's main concern about OBOR is the fact that CPEC, which is a part of the same, passes through Pakistan-controlled Gilgit-Baltistan region, which India claims as its own.

Moreover, Beijing's rapid naval expansion in the Indian Ocean region and the manner in which it has sought to engage with India's neighbours like Sri Lanka and Maldives, overwhelming them with loans to build strategic assets like ports, have only further unnerved India.

For the OBOR conference on Sunday, Nepal has sent its deputy PM and finance minister Krishna Bahadur Mahara.

"We are aware of India's reservations about CPEC but Nepal is not taking any position on the issue by joining OBOR," said Upadhyaya.

"We would like the two countries to resolve their differences amicably. And on any security-related issue between China and India, Nepal's position is neutral.

However, for Nepal to benefit economically, it is important we have better ties with our neighbour to the north too," he said. He pointed to how other Indian neighbours like Sri Lanka too have endorsed OBOR.

Sri Lanka's current debt crisis originated from the loans which the country acquired from China at a high rate of interest under former President Mahinda Rajapaksa.

According to some estimates, Maldives now owes almost 70% of its external debt to China. About 65 countries are participating in the conference.

[SSridhar]

India to skip One Belt One Road meet in bid to keep ‘PoK road’ open

Resolute in its opposition to China's 'One Belt One Road', India will be a significant absentee at the OBOR conference which opens in Beijing on Sunday.

Despite Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi's assertion and virtual threats by its diplomats to "isolate" India, Modi government has refused to budge, with only a handful of academics to attend the forum.

India believes participation would have weakened its case on sovereignty over Gilgit-Baltistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir because it would be tantamount to accepting the Chinese and Pakistani position on the region being "northern Pakistan". India has been protesting the China-Pakistan stand since 1963.

Chinese ambassador Luo Zhaohui, addressing a think tank in Delhi last week, said, "China and India had successful experience of delinking sovereignty disputes from bilateral relations before.

Historically, we have had close cooperation along the Silk Road. Why shouldn't we support this kind of cooperation today?" Suggestions by Chinese diplomats are on similar lines: India did not object when the Karakoram highway was built, or when other China-Pakistan projects happened.

But New Delhi has refused to budge from its stand. In April, India lodged a protest when a vocational university in Suzhou signed an agreement with Gilgit-Baltistan to set up a CPEC centre. In March, India took objection when China launched yidaiyilu.gov.cn ('yidaiyilu' is OBOR in Chinese), a website where Gilgit-Baltistan was shown as part of Pakistan, a position that even Islamabad's constitution does not endorse.

India also protested when the "chief minister" of Gilgit-Baltistan visited Xinjiang and when Chinese media reported joint patrols in PoK.

The first Indian demarche was served to then vice foreign minister Geng Biao in July, 1961, in which India's envoy to China G Parthasarathi, on his last day, said, "Pakistan has no borders with China...We know about your dispatching sentinels to border areas, but if it goes beyond that, if you state that you are willing to consider negotiating borders with Pakistan, there will be sharp reaction on India's part. India cannot be blamed for the consequences that occur."

In 1969, India protested against Chinese assistance to Pakistan to build the Karakoram highway in a demarche on June 25, "Chinese assistance to Pakistan to construct highways in portion of Indian territory under the illegal occupation of Pakistan is a fresh step taken by China to further aggravate Sino-Indian relations. The consequences are to be borne entirely by them."

In 1983, India once again flagged issues when the Khunjerab Pass was opened to civilian traffic, saying neither China nor Pakistan had any locus standi on this part of India.

These protests continued when the pass was opened to tourists in 1986 and in 1993 when Pakistan and Xinjinag signed an MoU on border trade.

The then external affairs minister Pranab Mukherjee gave an earful to Yang Jiechi in September 2008 about Pervez Musharraf 's pact with China on building roads in PoK and railway line across the Khunjerab Pass.

India also objected in 2010 when reports surfaced about China sending 11,000 troops to Gilgit-Baltistan.

After 2014, Modi has asked China to respect a "One-India" policy. Two aspects stand out. First, India has not stopped protesting, and second China has not paid heed to India's objections.

China's approach is exactly the same as it is in the South China Sea — ignore protests and continue to change the ground reality bit by bit.

[shiv]

OBOR is China's main geopolitical strategy to gain numero uno status w/o fighting a global war with US. Global hegemony is realized thru (a) ability to set ground rules for global economic activity/trade and (b) project military power globally. While china is on course to be global military power in about 20 years, things are much more difficult on the economic front. China has to replace the US dollar as reserve currency with the reminbi to gain rule making status. But China has 3+ trillion of USD reserves. How to do this? OBOR is the way.

With respect - this sounds like a paragraph from a students guidebook on "How to become numero uno global power"

From the American viewpoint anything that reduces and replaces them will become number one - which the US does not like. But the fact is that the US never grew as big as the British empire and is not showing any signs of staying on top for as long as the British did. This may give the Brits bragging rights - but the fact is that history made it just right for the Brits to rule. The US simply stepped into Brit shoes with more ideals and good intentions than the Brits but they are being knocked out by global forces - not just China. China happens to be the biggest kid on the block right now but I repeat that "claiming territory" is not the same as occupying and holding territory. I think India, China and Pakistan know this perfectly well - so let us not pretend that China will hold territory halfway across the world simply by creating debt. Militarily one needs allies and bases. No allies and no bases - it is difficult to exert power globally even if one shouts loudly that one is a global power. The US has done better on that count - but still never came close to Britain on "sheer scale"