Chinese Premier's vist to India

SHASH2K2

New Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
5,711
Likes
730
Its time for a postmortem


Hot coals burn under India's red carpet


Despite his charm offensive that looks like a remix of the India-China friendship chant hummed more than five decades back, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao's second Indian trip ended last week with many nice words, bumper trade deals, but hardly anything else otherwise.

At the end of his three-day Indian sojourn, Wen reiterated what he told Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during his trip to Beijing in 2008; that India and China relations have "transcended beyond their bilateral dimension and have acquired global and strategic significance".

"Our ties have gone beyond bilateral scope and assumed global responsibility. When China and India have a heart-to-heart



conversation, the whole world will listen, and we have reason to be proud of that," Wen said in a public meeting India after concluding his meeting with Manmohan. "Our endeavors have caught the attention of the world. The world is undergoing major development and changes, we should seize the opportunity and lose no time in deepening our ties."

Beyond those refreshing words and an ambitious trade target, however, Wen's second India trip made little breakthrough in resolving the prickly issues dogging their relationship in the recent years.

While a section of the Chinese media termed Wen's trip "unconventional" - since traditionally both exchanged just one visit of their leaders' during their official tenure-there was no dearth of warmth though.

Hailing Wen's "close friendship" with the Indian prime minister, Wen said, "I am glad to pay an official visit to India, China's great neighbor." India and China "are friends and not rivals, we shall always be friends and never be rivals. This must be the firm conviction of every Chinese and every Indian," he added.

"We [Manmohan and Wen] have [also] reached a consensus on strengthening our strategic relationship; the pressing task now is to turn that consensus into reality. I am confident we will do it for the glory of the oriental civilization," he said.

Charming words, but according to Srikanth Kondapalli, a professor in Chinese studies at Delhi, Jawaharlal University, Wen's India trip appeared like any other business trip with the usual announcements regarding reiteration of mutual respect, enhancing trade, investment flows, cultural and educational cooperation and the like.

"It was a purely diplomatic mission that made very few attempts at addressing India's political concerns," said a former diplomat (who had served a diplomatic mission in China recently), requesting anonymity.

"So, there was no clear support on India's ambition to become a permanent member of the UNSC [United Nations Security Council]; no expressed sympathy of the 26/11 terror attacks [on Mumbai]; no mention Pakistan's involvement in exporting terrorism; and no firm assurance on disputing the outstanding border issues", he added.

According to experts, these issues are significant as far as India-China relationship is concerned. While the two Asian giants have managed to set their political differences and "forge a healthy trade relationship", says Peng Gang, a top Chinese economic diplomat in India, it is also true that it is important for the two countries "to also sort out their political differences".

Even as the two countries once claimed that that they been natural friends for decades - ever since the then Indian prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru and his Chinese counterpart Mao Zedong coined the phrase "Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai" (brothers) - there has been a long legacy of tensions.

In 1962 for instance, the two countries has fought a brief war over their shared 3,500 kilometer border. Decades on, that conflict has raised its ugly head several times.

In past year though there have been some added thorns. Last year for instance, China's practice of issuing visas to people from Indian-administered Kashmir on separate pieces of paper met with intense disapproval from India since China offered the standard visas to other Indians. Since China still hasn't given any explanation for that move, in India it was perceived as China's tacit acceptance of Kashmir as a separate state.

Later India retaliated by refusing to allow a Chinese diplomat to visit its troubled northeastern state of Manipur for a lecture, while bilateral ties received its severest blow in August, when in a "tit-for-tat diplomacy" China refused a visa to a Kashmir-based general.

Beijing's cooperation with India's troubled neighbor Pakistan on missile development, cross-border infrastructure and a deep-water port have been issues that prick New Delhi.

China too is strongly critical about India providing exile to the Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama, and claims that India's north-eastern state of Arunachal Pradesh as its own.

Besides say sources from the Indian industry lobby Confederation of Indian Industry (CII), even as bilateral trade has been booming, India hasn't really benefited as much as it should have.

"Despite hard pushes China has denied greater access of Indian companies to Chinese markets," says Anjan Roy, economic adviser to the CII. Gang argues that "India too has been protective about its markets by imposing many non-trade tariff barriers."

Still, both countries managed score a win-win in area of bilateral trade.

The countries set a new bilateral trade target to more than double to $100 billion by 2015 from the 2009-10 level by increasing cooperation in many sectors. The bilateral trade between India and China was $43 billion in fiscal 2009-10 and is expected to rise to $ 60 billion this year, a 16-fold increase over the past eight years.

Experts say even as India has a negative trade balance of over $19 billion with China, the new trade target speaks volumes for the maturity with which the two countries have managed to separate their business from politics.

Deals valued at over $16 billion - and numbering more than 48 - were signed in the areas of power, telecom and financial sectors, dwarfing the $10 billion bilateral trade deals - $10 billion-India signed US President Barack Obama just a few weeks earlier.

China also agreed to help India reduce its trade deficit by removing trade barriers, and supporting Indian participation in its national and regional trade fairs, enhance exchange and cooperation of pharmaceutical supervision and expedite completion of negotiations on agriculture products.

This is why, even as Wen's India trip has left many expectations (from the Indian side at least) unfulfilled, according to Gang, it has been significant for achieving something much bigger. "The most important outcome of the premier's visit has been that it has taken the India-China relationship to another level and has set a new base for enhanced mutual trust and further cooperation," he said.
 

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
5,008
Likes
2,305
Country flag
Japan and South Korea only copied to get their economies off the ground (both of their economies were virtually nonexistent after WWII). But by the late 70s both economies innovated tremendously, which is how they got to where they are now. Look at Japan's and South Korea's entertainment and electronics industry; there is no way it was created just by copying the West.

Copying for a while to get an economy off the ground is okay, but China is the world's second largest economy and yet still lacks the innovation necessary to become economically dominant.
So, you admit that they did copycat in certain period. Only when their economy reach a certain stage, they turned to innovation. Did china reach that stage? I doubt it. Yes, China is the second largest economy now, but what about GDP per capita? There are more than 100million people living under poverty.
 

civfanatic

Retired
Ambassador
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
4,562
Likes
2,572
So, you admit that they did copycat in certain period. Only when their economy reach a certain stage, they turned to innovation. Did china reach that stage? I doubt it. Yes, China is the second largest economy now, but what about GDP per capita? There are more than 100million people living under poverty.
They copied existing industries because innovation is risky and requires considerable investment in time and capital, plus there is no guarantee of success. The war-torn East Asian economies could not afford to dabble with innovation at first, because copying is much more risk-free. I'm assuming China was in a similar situation.

The European countries, on the other hand, had affluent middle classes and comparatively few internal and external problems, which allowed them to innovate on a large scale.

And when it comes to economic growth, there are no "rules of stages" that need to be followed. For example, it was traditionally thought that a country had to go through a fixed growth scale of traditional agricultural economy --> industrialized economy --> postindustrial economy (service based). India defied this pattern by going straight from an agriculture-based economy to a service-based economy, skipping the industrial part. Even with higher levels of poverty and lower per capita income, India is in many ways more innovative than China, especially in telecommunications. So your argument that China cannot afford to innovate just because of its impoverished population is not true. It is the middle class which drives innovation, and China (I think) has a much larger middle class than India.

Once again, there is nothing wrong with copying, per se. It is a cheaper and lower-risk way of economic growth than innovation. But countries become economically dominant by setting economic trends, not following them. And if China wants to become economically dominant, it has to do the same.
 

SHASH2K2

New Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
5,711
Likes
730
I Think this thread is going out of direction. This thread was for visit of Chinese premier.Since trip is over its time to check what we gained for this trip.
Did we really gained something from this trip ? If yes then what or if we lost something then it should be about what we lost.

IMHO opinion we gained nothing out of it. All major political and financial issue were left unresolved. We talked about everything but gained nothing.
1. stapled visa issue
2. trade imbalance.
3. border dispute.
4. china support for pakistan .
These are all left unresolved and infact situation has gone from bad to worse.
 

badguy2000

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
5,133
Likes
746
I Think this thread is going out of direction. This thread was for visit of Chinese premier.Since trip is over its time to check what we gained for this trip.
Did we really gained something from this trip ? If yes then what or if we lost something then it should be about what we lost.

IMHO opinion we gained nothing out of it. All major political and financial issue were left unresolved. We talked about everything but gained nothing.
1. stapled visa issue
2. trade imbalance.
3. border dispute.
4. china support for pakistan .
These are all left unresolved and infact situation has gone from bad to worse.
it is too naive to make the two country trust each other before the border disputes is solved.

anyhow, the border disputes is the core of all troubles between CHina and india.

Once border disputes are sovled, others troubles can be easily dealt with, such as Tibet,Pakistan...etc .
 

SHASH2K2

New Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
5,711
Likes
730
it is too naive to make the two country trust each other before the border disputes is solved.

anyhow, the border disputes is the core of all troubles between CHina and india.

Once border disputes are sovled, others troubles can be easily dealt with, such as Tibet,Pakistan...etc .
What you are trying to say is similar to someone holding gun over head and asking him to sign a deal . But You forgot that same can be done by other party as well. China unconditional support to Pakistan belligerence has put whole world in danger and you will realize it when xinxiang will burn.
 

DMF

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2010
Messages
161
Likes
20
I Think this thread is going out of direction. This thread was for visit of Chinese premier.Since trip is over its time to check what we gained for this trip.
Did we really gained something from this trip ? If yes then what or if we lost something then it should be about what we lost.

IMHO opinion we gained nothing out of it. All major political and financial issue were left unresolved. We talked about everything but gained nothing.
1. stapled visa issue
2. trade imbalance.
3. border dispute.
4. china support for pakistan .
These are all left unresolved and infact situation has gone from bad to worse.
MR WEN'visit to India is a success, the two premiers were friendly, and business is done, since the problems are unsolvable, so just leave it, and not let the problems out of control and cause both of us troubles.
About Pakistan, I wonder why you Indians go crazy about Pakistan, you are much more powerful and better off than Pakis, you know Paki is our neighbor also, and very important to us geopolitically, not in the sense of dealing with you Indians. Pakistan is on the way that China goes to the west. Also we need Pakistan to fend off the terrorists on our west border
 

SHASH2K2

New Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
5,711
Likes
730
MR WEN'visit to India is a success,
I would like to know your definition of success .

the two premiers were friendly
have you seen any other premier holding collars of each other in front of cameras? Except Pakistan offcourse .

and business is done
exactly my points . Chinese were here for business and thats all they got. Asking for almost everything while ready to give nothing.

since the problems are unsolvable, so just leave it, and not let the problems out of control and cause both of us troubles.
except Border issue all other problems are very much solvable . You mean to say stapled visa issue , chinese incursions in indian territory or chinas support to Pakistani nuclear program cannot be solved?

you know Paki is our neighbor also, and very important to us geopolitically, not in the sense of dealing with you Indians. Pakistan is on the way that China goes to the west. Also we need Pakistan to fend off the terrorists on our west borde
Does Pakistan need nukes to take on those terrorists ?
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
This is Chinese car Cherry which they claim they developed.



Paul Tan is reporting that the QQ, a car being sold by Chinese company Chery is such a blatant rip-off of the Daewoo Matiz that Daewoo's distributor had to take out ads in the local Malaysian media informing consumers about what the "real" version was.

A Daewoo spokesperson went further, claiming "If you didn't have the name tags on the car, you couldn't tell them apart. It's such a knockoff that you can pull a door off of the Chevy Spark and it fits on the QQ - and it fits so well that the seals on the door hold." These are some pretty serious allegations and it remains to be seen exactly what Daewoo (which is owned by GM) will do about the copycat.

We've no doubt that Chinese cars will eventually improve in quality to rival the best, just as the Japanese did almost 50 years ago. It's just a shame to see them taking the easy way out of it.

Cherry is Daewoo Matiz
I have a Matiz!!

But that is not a Chery.

But then Daewoo must have copied it by going into a Time Machine!
 

SHASH2K2

New Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
5,711
Likes
730
India Digs In Its Heels as China Flexes Its Muscles



NEW DELHI — It has been the season of geopolitical hugs in India — with one noticeable exception. One after the other, the leaders of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have descended on India, accompanied by delegations of business leaders, seeking closer ties with this rising South Asian giant. The Indian media, basking in the high-level attention, have nicknamed them the "P-5."
Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain got a warm reception last summer. Then President Obama wowed a skeptical Indian establishment during his November visit. President Nicolas Sarkozy of France signed nuclear deals in early December, while President Dmitri A. Medvedev of Russia departed last week with a fistful of defense contracts after winning praise for Moscow as a "special partner."

The exception to the cheery mood was the mid-December visit of Prime Minister Wen Jiabao of China. Mr. Wen did secure business deals, announce new trade goals and offer reassurances of friendly Chinese intentions. But the trip also underscored that many points of tension between the Asian giants — trade imbalances, their disputed border and the status of Kashmir — are growing worse. And the Indian foreign policy establishment, once reluctant to challenge China, is taking a harder line.

"The Wen visit has widened the gap publicly between India and China," said Ranjit Gupta, a retired Indian diplomat and one of many vocal analysts pushing a more hawkish line toward China. "And it represents for the first time a greater realism in the Indian establishment's approach to China."

India aspires to membership on the United Nations Security Council, and China is now the only permanent member nation that has not explicitly endorsed such a move. But what has rattled Indian leaders even more is their contention that China is being deliberately provocative in Kashmir as it grows closer to Pakistan, China's longtime ally and India's nemesis. China has also been expanding its diplomatic and economic influence around South Asia, stepping up its involvement in the affairs of Sri Lanka, Nepal and the Maldives.

Mr. Wen's visit was supposed to help address those tensions at a time when India is starting to draw closer to the United States. Among Chinese leaders, Mr. Wen is perceived as a friend of India, and his 2005 visit was regarded as a breakthrough after he and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh agreed on a broad framework to address the border dispute.

For decades since fighting a brief border war, the two countries had argued over the boundary lines, with China making claims to Arunachal Pradesh, an eastern Indian state, and India claiming portions of Tibet that abut Indian-controlled Kashmir. The 2005 deal fostered optimism that some sort of quid pro quo compromise could be reached, enabling the two countries to concentrate on trade. And trade took off: it has risen tenfold to almost $60 billion, with Mr. Wen setting a new goal of $100 billion.

But Indian leaders now complain that trade is far too lopsided in China's favor and say that Indian corporations face too many obstacles in entering the Chinese market. Mr. Wen promised to help Indian corporations sell their products in China, but Indian officials are skeptical.

Meanwhile, China infuriated India by starting to issue special stapled paper visas — rather than the standard visa — for anyone in Indian-controlled Kashmir traveling to China on the grounds that Kashmir is a disputed territory. China later objected to including a top Indian general responsible for Kashmir in a military exchange in China. In response, Indian officials angrily suspended all military exchanges between the countries. Indian officials had thought Mr. Wen might reverse the stapled visas policy on his trip, but he instead only called for more diplomatic consultations.

Indian commentators have noticed that articles in the Chinese state-run media have renewed Chinese claims that the disputed border between the nations is roughly 1,240 miles in length — even as India puts the length at about 2,175 miles. The difference roughly represents the border between Indian-controlled Kashmir and Tibetan China. By omitting this section, the Chinese are questioning the status of Indian-controlled Kashmir, a position that buttresses Pakistan's own claims, several Indian analysts have argued.

The most visible evidence that these problems were deepening came in the joint communiqué issued by the two nations at the end of Mr. Wen's visit. China typically demands that nations voice support for the one-China policy, which holds that Taiwan is an inalienable part of China. In past communiqués, India has agreed to such language, but this time it was omitted, a clear sign of Indian irritation.
"It has been in every communiqué, but the Chinese didn't even bring it up," said a senior Indian official, speaking on the condition of anonymity. "I think they knew if they had brought it up, they knew we would have demanded some movement on the stapled visa issue and the Kashmir issue."
The senior official added: "They must understand that there is a prospect of the relationship really going south. They will have to somehow moderate their stand on Kashmir. And they will have to take concrete steps to address the trade imbalance."

India and China still cooperate on climate change and international trade policy, and some Indian diplomats grumble that the positive aspects of the relationship are too often overlooked by aggressive media organizations and an emboldened group of strategic analysts pushing for a harder line. China's state-run media outlets recently broadcast images of a new tunnel being completed through the Himalayas near the Indian border. These reports looked to some like boasting about the country's engineering prowess. In India, they were presented as a warning that China was building its infrastructure ever closer to India.

At the same time, India is watching warily as China pursues hydro projects that could affect the downstream flow of the Brahmaputra River in India.

Some Indian analysts note that tensions with China have increased in lockstep with the warming trend between India and the United States. During his visit, Mr. Obama spoke of a "defining partnership" between India and the United States and encouraged India to play a bigger role not only in South Asia but also in East Asia, China's backyard. Mr. Singh, in fact, had just finished a trip to Japan, Malaysia and Vietnam as part of India's "Look East" policy to build trade and diplomatic ties in the region.

"Our challenge will be to build our own leverage," the senior Indian official said.

"That is why the relationships with the United States, with Japan, with other Southeast Asian parties, all that will become even more important."
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top