Ties strained as India cuts fuel subsidy to Bhutan

amoy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
5,982
Likes
1,849
Care to explain whatever that means...I stated a simple fact which is public knowledge. How does this list of nation negates my assertion ?
No, not a negation of your assertion.

Instead an affirmation, i.e. Revisionist - India, shall learn from the status-quo-ist as far as the fuel subsidy to Bhutan is concerned, contrary to @trackwhack 's claim "Money buys no friends'.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TrueSpirit

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
1,893
Likes
841
No, not a negation of your assertion.

Instead an affirmation, i.e. Revisionist - India, shall learn from the status-quo-ist as far as the fuel subsidy to Bhutan is concerned, contrary to @trackwhack 's claim "Money buys no friends'.
Well, mundane jingoism apart, IMHO, all interactions involving living beings (even, non-living) are mutual transactions, whose outcome is determined by degree of give & take.

So, stating that there can be a selfless relationship (e.g. friendship, in context of thread) between two entities be it humans (e.g. marriage which is a social contract), institutions or nations, is quite puerile.

The forms of give-n-take might be different like security guarantee, economic security, monetary assistance or moral support, but the transactional nature of all relationships cannot be denied.

Having said that, humans have devised (evolved) something thing called "sense of ethics" (something that is not manifestly rooted in nature).

All human transactions as long as within that ethical boundaries are sustainable.

However, imbalance strikes in, when some entities (affected by their natural instinct) tend to overdo & cross the ethical confines.

Hope you are getting the drift :namaste:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

t_co

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2012
Messages
2,538
Likes
709
Well, mundane jingoism apart, IMHO, all interactions involving living beings (even, non-living) are mutual transactions, whose outcome is determined by degree of give & take.

So, stating that there can be a selfless relationship (e.g. friendship, in context of thread) between two entities be it humans (e.g. marriage which is a social contract), institutions or nations, is quite puerile.

The forms of give-n-take might be different like security guarantee, economic security, monetary assistance or moral support, but the transactional nature of all relationships cannot be denied.

Having said that, humans have devised (evolved) something thing called "sense of ethics" (something that is not manifestly rooted in nature).

All human transactions as long as within that ethical boundaries are sustainable.

However, imbalance strikes in, when some entities (affected by their natural instinct) tend to overdo & cross the ethical confines.

Hope you are getting the drift :namaste:
Except the sense of ethics to which you refer is by no means universal. What you might consider ethical (ethnic self-determination) or derived your ethical system (Indian territorial claims) I consider illegitimate.

What's more, given the nature of ethics, they all, at the end, rest on a priori normative arguments which are intrinsically subjective.

Ergo, one only projects their system of ethics as far as one's soft or hard power allows. And India is in no position to project either soft or hard power over China. Parity, if one is generous towards India - but not supremacy, not by a long shot.
 

t_co

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2012
Messages
2,538
Likes
709
Howmany friends do China have ?? Like you IMAGINED about India & Bhutan ??
Let's see here:

Africa
Angola
Tanzania
Sudan
Zambia
Mozambique
Ghana
Algeria

South America
Venezuela
Bolivia
Nicaragua

Europe
Germany
The Netherlands

The SCO
Russia
Tajikistan
Kazakhstan
Uzbekistan
Turkmenistan
Kyrgyzstan

Other Asian States
Iran
Pakistan
North Korea
Cambodia
Laos
Sri Lanka
Bangladesh
 

TrueSpirit

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
1,893
Likes
841
Let's see here:

Africa
Angola
Tanzania
Sudan
Zambia
Mozambique
Ghana
Algeria

South America
Venezuela
Bolivia
Nicaragua

Europe
Germany
The Netherlands

The SCO
Russia
Tajikistan
Kazakhstan
Uzbekistan
Turkmenistan
Kyrgyzstan

Other Asian States
Iran
Pakistan
North Korea
Cambodia
Laos
Sri Lanka
Bangladesh
You are so right. All these nations are sworn enemies of the Republic of India & its people :rofl:
 

hit&run

United States of Hindu Empire
Mod
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
14,104
Likes
63,370
Let's see here:

Africa
Angola
Tanzania
Sudan
Zambia
Mozambique
Ghana
Algeria

South America
Venezuela
Bolivia
Nicaragua

Europe
Germany
The Netherlands

The SCO
Russia
Tajikistan
Kazakhstan
Uzbekistan
Turkmenistan
Kyrgyzstan

Other Asian States
Iran
Pakistan
North Korea
Cambodia
Laos
Sri Lanka
Bangladesh
Chimco, India stopping fuel subsidy doesn't mean Bhutan is now enemy of India, not even Sri Lanka regardless of any traction. Global diplomacy doesn't work like it work between sycophant Pakistan and China.

50 cent army work day and night to post gibberish like that.

A long list can be posted by Indians but we do not have habit of speaking for others like Chines thugs have.

Are all above are ready to fight a war for China, not even your whore Pakistan will come to rescue you.

What a cheap bunch of these Chinese are, in one hand the pretend to be knowing every thing other hand they post a list of nation they have diplomatic relationship like another nation on this planet would have.
 
Last edited:

Dovah

Untermensch
Senior Member
Joined
May 23, 2011
Messages
5,614
Likes
6,793
Country flag
Let's see here:

Africa
Angola
Tanzania
Sudan
Zambia
Mozambique
Ghana
Algeria

South America
Venezuela
Bolivia
Nicaragua

Europe
Germany
The Netherlands

The SCO
Russia
Tajikistan
Kazakhstan
Uzbekistan
Turkmenistan
Kyrgyzstan

Other Asian States
Iran
Pakistan
North Korea
Cambodia
Laos
Sri Lanka
Bangladesh
Most of these nations are aid recipients, weary of the U.S or pathological lackeys(Pakistan). And you are using a very broad definition of 'friend' apparently. By this definition, half the world is India's friend.
 

TrueSpirit

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
1,893
Likes
841
Except the sense of ethics to which you refer is by no means universal. What you might consider ethical (ethnic self-determination) or derived your ethical system (Indian territorial claims) I consider illegitimate.

What's more, given the nature of ethics, they all, at the end, rest on a priori normative arguments which are intrinsically subjective.

Ergo, one only projects their system of ethics as far as one's soft or hard power allows. And India is in no position to project either soft or hard power over China. Parity, if one is generous towards India - but not supremacy, not by a long shot.
Agreed. However, you misconstrued. My post was not in India vs China mode, or comparing the leverage they exercise over each other.

While you are right about the "subjective" part, but PRC's "Might is Right" is an inherently unstable proposition whose implementation on ground is intrinsically imbalanced.

Anything imposed is resisted with greater intensity. As long as all parties realize this (US, India, China, anyone for that matter), no escalation happens. All disputes can be contained & a win-win proposal could be worked out.

When either party inebriated in its haughtiness tends to ignore this fundamental reality, repercussions are there. Often unsavory, for the mightier one, as well.
 

TrueSpirit

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
1,893
Likes
841

How India is losing Bhutan, its last 'friend' in South Asia


In the hostile 'desert' environment of South Asia, India's relationship with the landlocked Himalayan kingdom of Bhutan has long been seen as an oasis. Where virtually every one of India's neighbours has turned borderline hostile against India – whom they accuse of being a 'big brother' – the relationship with Bhutan has endured thus far.

But India's effort at promoting coercive commerce diplomacy with its last 'friend' in South Asia may have had the effect of cutting even that stable relationship adrift – and into the waiting arms of China, which is looking to expand its diplomatic influence in Thimphu. Bhutan is the only one of China's 14 neighbours with which it doesn't have diplomatic relations, and it has been looking to win over Bhutan from India's orbit, so to speak.

Early this month, India withdrew all subsidy on cooking gas and kerosene that it had been providing to Bhutan, sending gas and kerosene prices in Bhutan soaring, in the days leading up to next week's general election. This has given rise to protests from within Bhutan that India was looking to stoke discontent within the kingdom in the hope of influencing the election outcome. Some commentators have gone so far as to call this "meddling" in Bhutan's internal affairs.

This has emerged as the most proximate reason for the strain in relations, although Indian diplomats claim that this was merely the latest in a long line of incidents that grated on the relationship.

According to Indian officials, the move to end the subsidy on cooking gas and kerosene was a purely a commercial decision, not a political one. They point out that India was facing its own subsidy constraints at home and was risking popular discontent at home by withdrawing subsidy. In such an atmosphere, the scope for providing 'blank cheque' subsidies in the form of developmental aid to neighbours had considerably diminished, they claim.

Indeed, these officials claim, virtually every one of India's neighbours – except Afghanistan – has seen delays or outright cuts in grants and plan outlays from India.

But even if it has some merit in it, the claim is being met with scepticism in Bhutan. India's handling of the matter has made for bad optics, which has only fed the sense that India is acting out of pique that the erstwhile government of Prime Minister Jigme Thinley had reoriented Bhutan's foreign policy towards China.

For instance, Bhutan's ambassador had written to External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid to ask after the recent cut in subsidies, but Khurshid has evidently not seen it yet, since he has been on the road. It reeks of an effort by the Indian government to postpone a decision on the subsidy cut until it is it too close to the elections.

In any case, Indian officials point with astonishment to the many different signals from Thinley that he was steering his government's foreign policy towards China and away from India. Last year, for instance, after a meeting with the Chinese Premier in Rio de Janeiro, his government imported 20 buses from China, which was seen in India as strengthening of Thimphu's commercial relationship with China at the cost of India.

Political commentators in Bhutan resent what they see as India's "overlordship" over the kingdom's affairs. Writing in his blog, political analyst Wangcha Sangley wondered: "Why do Indian media and politicians want to castrate Bhutan for the most harmless relationship effort with China? Just the other day, I heard a rumour of a bureaucrat of India chastising Bhutanese leadership of being "dishonest". What the hell is that suppose to mean? Which national leaders and governments bare its soul to another nation? We are not paid sex workers that benefactors need to know when our eyelashes and asses move and in which direction."

He then urges Indian officials and the media to "treat Bhutan as a friend, not a pawn to be manipulated"¦ Stop herding us like lambs in a pen to be slaughtered whenever India desires a dish of lamb stew."

Simultaneously, Bhutan has been pressing India to accept a hike in tariff from the hydropower generated from the Chukha project in Bhutan. But the Indian side sees the tariff hike as extraordinary, and unwarranted.

Even given its diplomatic missteps, India is not without friends in the kingdom. In a thoughtful post on Kuensel, writer Dorji observes that 'sovereignty' – which India's critics in the kingdom cite – works not in the abstract, but in daily lives as well. Bhutan and India, he note, share a "symbiotic relationship", which requires Bhutan to be "intelligent and cautious" in its dealings with India.

Bhutan's leaders, he adds, should "not be delusional about how we conduct our relations with India." At this point, he reasons, it is in Bhutan's interest to have closer relations with India than with China. Likewise, it is in India's interest to offer financial and technical help to Bhutan. "The relationship with India has been strained, let's mend it now."

But despite such expressions of goodwill for India from within Bhutan, India seems set on scoring a spectacular diplomatic self-goal – and seeing its last 'friend' in South Asia slip out of its orbit.
 

arnabmit

Homo Communis Indus
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
6,242
Likes
7,522
Country flag
India to restore Bhutan fuel subsidy soon - The Times of India

NEW DELHI: The stunning victory of the People's Democratic Party (PDP) in Bhutan's second democratic elections has raised hopes of an early settlement to the situation arising out of India's withdrawal of subsidy on its supply of LPG and kerosene.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has written to PDP chief Tshering Tobgay to convey that he has already asked his officials to prepare for discussions over India's Plan assistance to Bhutan. Singh has assured him of India's "unflinching and steadfast" support and that New Delhi is and will always be mindful of Bhutan's interests and that India is a privileged partner of Bhutan in its socio-economic progress.

As is well recognized here, Bhutan may be a tiny, landlocked country but is strategically important for India. After the PDP swept the polls on Saturday, senior government sources here said New Delhi was looking forward to continuing its "special and unique" relationship with Bhutan. They said India would not allow the rural poor in Bhutan to suffer and that efforts would be made to expedite terms and conditions for a fresh wave of financial assistance to Thimphu.

While New Delhi has painstakingly tried to convince all that Druk Phuensum Tshogpa (DPT) chief and former prime minister Jigme Thinley's policies were not a dampener in bilateral ties, and cited his nine visits to India in the past five years, the truth is that India doesn't mind seeing the back of Thinley.

New Delhi was alarmed not just by Thinley, who made himself the official ambassador of Bhutan's Gross National Happiness phenomenon, reaching out to Beijing but also the manner in which he established diplomatic ties with many other countries without bothering to take South Block into confidence.

While many in Bhutan have attributed motives to India's decision to cut subsidy on cooking gas and kerosene during the elections, official sources here said that for India the successful conduct of a second election is indicative of consolidation of democracy in Bhutan. "India has always held that it is happy to work with all in Bhutan. We look to continue the special and unique relationship," said a top government source.

What's interesting is that it was the PDP which seemed to be giving vent to India's concerns during the election when it repeatedly blamed DPT for strained ties with New Delhi. The party blamed Thinley's policies even for the subsidy cut by India.
 

amoy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
5,982
Likes
1,849
Bhutan and China will establish diplomatic relationship shortly, subject to official announcement. This will make China closer to becoming a formal member of SAARC.
 
Last edited:

OtmShank'Srevenge

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2016
Messages
22
Likes
5
Its puzzling why India would do something like this at a time like this. It can't cost that much in the grand scheme of things to support people that are basically an Indian protectorate to help them meet basic human needs.


The way China with unwavering determination to destroy the Tibetan people and culture as well as any non Han culture or ethnicities under their territorial control .. I can't imagine the Bhutanese people or leadership would be eager to accept China as it's friend or strategic partner
 

airtel

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Messages
3,430
Likes
7,814
Country flag
Its puzzling why India would do something like this at a time like this. It can't cost that much in the grand scheme of things to support people that are basically an Indian protectorate to help them meet basic human needs.


The way China with unwavering determination to destroy the Tibetan people and culture as well as any non Han culture or ethnicities under their territorial control .. I can't imagine the Bhutanese people or leadership would be eager to accept China as it's friend or strategic partner
old news of 2013 , UPA era .
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top