" CCP-China Companies and Investment in India ? "

Discussion in 'Economy & Infrastructure' started by roma, Sep 30, 2014.

  1. roma

    roma NRI in Europe Senior Member

    Aug 10, 2009
    Likes Received:
    1. Given that there are those who started a thread about their haircut and also about their own wonderful reddish-golden-skin face (?) and also another thread which was a one-liner and could have been answered with a simplistic google search, i hope therefore that this initiative of mine can be considered relatively allowable in comparison, i think it should be

    2. My question is " CCP-China Companies and Investment in India ? "
    Further follow-up questions :-
    (a) Is ccp-china the only source for investment ,
    (b) is it indeed the Best source for investment
    (c) or rather should ANY investment from china if allowed, be strictly
    monitored and certainly not be a participant in any defence ,security or
    technological endeavour neither in any essential resource such as water,
    energy or electricity "

    3. In which case what is left for CHina to invest in ?
    My answer is that China should not have any controlling stake in any
    company in any of the areas listed above . But as a minority holder and
    without having any decision making or voting rights be allowed to be a
    minority share holder of an appropriate level so that it CAN profit from the
    financial, gains of any company but as i said not have any decision making
    control .

    So in other words in return for a minority shareholding from ccp-china, they
    can in return be given a share of the monetary profits , but not any
    controlling share or access to sensitive information .

    So they can invest in thousands of indian companies and therefore earn
    substantial profit which will be well worth their time and research.

    4. Now still we have to be aware that the money they earn may well go to
    their weapons producing industries and end up being deployed in Aksai and
    other border areas ....so even in that case would we may want to put some
    limit or should we say that the benefit we received from their money is
    worth allowing the profit to return to them or should we have some other
    alternatives such as defining the amount of plough back from profits into the
    company and then allowing profits to be taken in instalments .... and there are
    also other arrangements possible .

    5. Now if the ccp-chinese react negatively to that i.e. that they are not quite
    satisfied with only monetary gain , then we may conclude that they obviously also
    want something else ... they want some form of control ....and perhaps they also want
    some access to information or some form of control on the indian system - be it essential
    matters like water , electricity or transportation .

    6. We then have to ask ourselves if such a position is allowable , given that we do have
    border problems , and also in our back yard, the Indian Ocean , plus we also have other
    strategic competition everywhere else on the face of this globe . So should we be allowing
    that ? i.e a competitor who has helped our good friend packland to go nuclear and also who
    has much more recently stated that " an attack on packland is an attack on ccp-jinx " ....
    thereby attempting to further put more partitions between ourselves and the packlanders in spite
    of the many cultural and other ties we have with our separated brothers . They also a couple of years
    back blocked asian bank loan for a project in arunachal pradesh and also played and obstacular role
    when india was being considered for inclusion into the nuclear suppliers group (NSG ) negotiations and it
    took a personal phone call from usa's george bush to chinas hu jintao to free the obstacles placed
    by them

    7. Further i would like to distinguish and draw a huge difference between allowing ccp-china to invest
    in state level ventures eg as they did in Gujerat and being allowed to participate in nation-wide
    infrastructural projects eg high-speed trains networks - the differences are obvious and i say we should
    not allow it -except as i stated above - only for monetary gain but not allowed any control or access to
    info . Secondly if we allow investment in too many states then effectively it becomes allowing nation-wide
    investment except that they did it in a piecemeal fashion.

    8. In summary i would like any and all members of the forum to give their opinion on Namo's idea
    of getting investment from ccp-jinx and its implications - any ideas even however far-fetched they
    may seem - because in today's world nothing is really that far out .

    many thanks in advance,
    best regards, and
    Namaste !
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2014
    Srinivas_K likes this.
  3. Dhairya Yadav

    Dhairya Yadav Regular Member

    Feb 27, 2012
    Likes Received:
    i dont think that getting investments from China would bring any problem. They should only be allowed to minority stakes. China has good trade relations with each of its enemy like Vietnam, Taiwan, Japan, US etc. So why should we shun it?
  4. anupamsurey

    anupamsurey Senior Member Senior Member

    Jun 19, 2014
    Likes Received:
    yes, your concerns are quiet genuine.
    china is such a clever country that it can convert the non military assets to military one quite easily. but again we need foreign investment in one or the other way. about infra projects we can construct roads and other infra's very quickly (as our private firms are quiet good at it, they only need the govt's nod and returns). but because of our tardiness we are lagging in rail and other modern tech, but china is not the only country which has expertise in speedy railways (we have assurance of japs- and lets see what is the outcome), or other modern infrastructure.
    and India will never have any defense agreements or co production plans with china, there are two things here which must be considered-1. such defence cooperation exist only between extremly friendly (having strategic importance, and no threat perceptions) countries, ex- indo-russia, indo-israel, indo-french or even indo-america, 2. india and china are still a threat to each other, and the trust is quiet shaky, so such agreements will not see light in near future.
    and i don't see any thing which china does can be superior to Indian work. the only difference is their govt and its knack of making quick decisions.
    roma likes this.

Share This Page