Chinese Premier's vist to India

amoy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
5,982
Likes
1,849
The Americans have a saying - Remember the Alamo! "Remember the Alamo" was a battle cry in which the bitterness of the Texans over the massacres by Mexican forces at the Alamo in San Antonio,
History is always so tricky depending on who narrates or interpretes it.

When did Alamo of Texas or Californa or "New" Mexico start to be part of the USA? Quite certain Mexicans tell a totally different story from yours about what happened on the "foreign" soil.

Betrayal? always a puzzling word for us as we understand Panchsheel in Bandung implied China and India would have to resolve differences amicably instead of one-sided advancing. Piety? or Doublespeak by Communists? No it's irrelevant to which party is in power.

Wen or MM Singh is saying it's not necessarily a zero sum game, we have to get over those mishaps, and be forward looking
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
Forward looking?

Friendship?

I am all for that.

However, it can't be friendship with swords and slights given by China in nauseating regularity.

If self respect and principles were not important, then why did China make such a song and a dance over Liu Xiaobo getting the Nobel Prize and imagine it, China blackmailing nations not to attend the Ceremony.

If China slyly toes Pakistan's line by stapling visas of Indians of Kashmir, if China refuses visa to Arunachali claiming it to be a part of China, if China refuses visa to an Indian General, just because he is serving in Kashmir, i India gives asylum to HH the Dalai Lama as per the UN protocol on Refugees (and China is a member of the Security Council!), then would it be wrong of India if she felt that these were unfriendly actions. And even then, if China expects that India, with bated breath and total humbleness, claim that China is perfect, then something, somewhere, is going drastically wrong!

In fact, Tibet is an independent country is what most Indians feel. Now, if the Govt of India says so, I am sure the Chinese would be delighted, right?

Looking forward does not mean being servile and in vassalage!

CHINA requires to do soul searching.

Practice before you preach, as they say!
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
FINAL COMMUNIQUÉ



Although the wording of the Final Communiqué was rather vague overall, the section on "Promotion of World Peace and Co-operation" was more precise and it stated as follows: "2"¦The Conference considered that disarmament and the prohibition of the production, experimentation and use of nuclear and thermo-nuclear weapons of war imperative to save [hu]mankind and civilisation from the fear and prospect of wholesale destruction. It considered that the nations of Asia and Africa assembled here have a duty towards humanity and civilisation to proclaim their support for disarmament and for the prohibition of these weapons and to appeal to nations principally concerned and to world opinion, to bring about such disarmament and prohibition"¦. The conference declared universal disarmament is an absolute necessity for the preservation of peace and requested the United Nations to continue its efforts and appealed to all concerned speedily to bring about the regulation, limitation, control and reduction of all armed forces and armaments, including the prohibition of the production, experimentation and use of all weapons of mass destruction, and to establish effective international control to this end."



The Final Communiqué also implored the participating nations to remain free from mistrust and fear, to show goodwill towards each other, to practice tolerance, to live together in peace with one another as good neighbors and to develop friendly cooperation on the basis of the following ten principles:

1.

Respect for fundamental human rights and for the purposes and principles of the charter of the United Nations
2.

Respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all nations
3.

Recognition of the equality of all races and of the equality of all nations large and small
4.

Abstention from intervention or interference in the internal affairs of another country
5.

Respect for the right of each nation to defend itself, singly or collectively, in conformity with the charter of the United Nations
6.

(a) Abstention from the use of arrangements of collective defence to serve any particular interests of the big powers

(b) Abstention by any country from exerting pressures on other countries

7.

Refraining from acts or threats of aggression or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any country
8.

Settlement of all international disputes by peaceful means, such as negotiation, conciliation, arbitration or judicial settlement as well as other peaceful means of the parties own choice, in conformity with the charter of the united nations
9.

Promotion of mutual interests and cooperation
10.

Respect for justice and international obligations.



BETRAYAL OF BANDUNG



Enduring unity and co-operation among the Asian and African nations, based on the above objects and principles, would have gravely affected the interests of the imperialist powers. Therefore, they did everything they could to disrupt the possibility of any such unity and co-operation. Through sustained intrigues they ensured that the friendship and good-neighbourliness which was built up especially between India and China until 1955, was suddenly turned to suspicion and bitterness in the latter half of the 1950s. This unpleasant development was no doubt a big set back for the concerns of the peace loving peoples of Asia. Thus, apart from giving the needed stimulus to the struggle to end colonialism, the purpose for which the conference was organised remained largely unfulfilled.



The failure of the Bandung conference to launch a permanent Asian-African countries organisation was a sign that it was the writ of the imperialist powers that ultimately prevailed, although Nehru did make a valiant attempt later to revive it in the form of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) in 1961.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
Now, check out if China met the requisites enunciated in the Conference!
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
All you asked is political favor or military favor instead of trade favor. Don't you think it is a little bit wired?
And remember, india is not among top trading partners of China. Even US or EU cannot force china to make concession with economic power. Why do you think india is special?
First of all, WE did not ask for favours.

If we did, then we would be going to Peking and not the Chinese Premier come scurrying and hotfoot to India.

Check your figures, with the recession, the US and EU markets are drying up. India is your market to compensate and that is why Wen has brought the largest business delegation ever! So, stop dreaming with the haze of propaganda and self delusion!

Wen and China are scared of the US coalescing all countries in the Asia Pacific Rim, that appears to be on the table as personified by Obama's visit to Asia.

China requires India and not the other way around, more so if we vigorously follow our Look East policy!

Quit showing Dutch courage!
 
Last edited:

SHASH2K2

New Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
5,711
Likes
730
Is it a policy shift or just a temporary strategy to fool Indians?


Following a year of taking a hard line on India, and more specifically, hitting out at New Delhi's relations with Washington, China's official media this week struck a markedly different tone on Sino-Indian ties, calling for cooperation instead of competition as Wen Jiabao began his three-day visit.

The Communist Party's English-language Global Times newspaper, which is published for an international audience, said in an editorial on Thursday "the dragon-elephant contention is a pseudo-proposition, but a true desire of U.S. and European conservatives."

"Their discussions of the dragon-elephant contention have polluted mutual observation between China and India," it added. "No matter whether the two emerging powers like it or not, Western interests will exert profound impact on each of their choices"¦. It is strange that the contention between China and India is especially singled out"¦.This is more like a trap set by the U.S. and Europe against China."

It was only last month that the state media here led the charge against the Indian government during U.S. President Barack Obama recent visit. One column in the official People's Daily, which also publishes the Global Times, had suggested "the U.S. and India are right now singing a duet, echoing each other."

Another column in the same newspaper, which is the Party's official outlet to articulate its views, had suggested that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's recent East Asia trip and India's "Look East policy" were actually attempts to "Look to encircle China".

For much of the past year, the official media in China has taken a hard line on India, often stressing the close relations between New Delhi and Washington. The tone this week, however, was notably different.

'A great opportunity to dispel rumours'

"Both countries should resist falling into the trap of imagining oneself as encircled by another," the widely-read Chinese-language Global Times, which voices the Party's views on foreign policy issues, said in an editorial on Wednesday.

Mr. Wen's on-going visit, the paper said, was "a great opportunity for dispelling rumours and to take concrete steps to further the bilateral relationship."

"No matter how hard the problems are, China and India should, and can, only develop good neighbourly relations," the paper said. "There is no other option. China and India are both too big to afford any confrontation, nor can the entire region afford a conflict. We should resort to conciliatory means to resolve problems, and this is in the interests of both countries."

But even amid this new found bonhomie, the English-language Global Times, regarded as a particularly nationalistic voice, couldn't resist a dig at India and the U.S. on Thursday.

"The title of "the biggest democratic nation" looks like a glass of red wine enjoyed together by India and the West," it wrote in an editorial. "But it doesn't generate anything substantial that is of India's national interests. With a huge population and much work left to be done in developing the economy, perhaps India won't get too drunk to act superior in front of China, because such superiority will delight India much less than it delights the West."
 

chex3009

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2010
Messages
929
Likes
201
Country flag
After the joint COMMUNIQUÉ, only thing which comes to mind, is that India should vigorously pursue Look East Policy especially strengthening trade and defence relations with Japan and South Korea. And on the other side bring chinese to the terms of balancing the trade deficits and bring in chinese expertise especially the infrastructure sector. This will give China the much required business it is seeking from India, and India in return will get a boost of chinese manufacturing expertise and infrastructure development.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was very soft not raising some sensitive issues including the Stapled Visa row and Mentioning Pakistan in 26/11 role. We can't show this level of softness to the chinese. Even Our PM accepted invitation to visit China in 2011, which was very hasty decision sighting the concessions China has made during this visit.
 

SHASH2K2

New Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
5,711
Likes
730
I would agree with you Bro. Chinese were on a business trip and all they talked about is business . No progress on any of contentious political issue . With trade already heavily balanced in their favour I cannot imagine whats going to happen in coming days.
 

amoy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
5,982
Likes
1,849
Wen is fading out...

Perhaps the new generation leadership at the helm of China may come up with a 'new' thinking.

IMO "business" is a relatively easy part to begin with while political aspects in the bilateral ties are a bit knotty. Naturally Wen avoids going in-depth over contentious political issues.
 

SHASH2K2

New Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
5,711
Likes
730
This trip is a disaster for India . As Times Now is saying " a trip that archived nothing " at least for India . we are fooled once again by clever Chinese.
 

SHASH2K2

New Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
5,711
Likes
730
Wen is fading out...

Perhaps the new generation leadership at the helm of China may come up with a 'new' thinking.

IMO "business" is a relatively easy part to begin with while political aspects in the bilateral ties are a bit knotty. Naturally Wen avoids going in-depth over contentious political issues.
You should be happy with wen. after all its all win win situation for china. they lost nothing and gained a lot.
 

chex3009

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2010
Messages
929
Likes
201
Country flag
IMO "business" is a relatively easy part to begin with while political aspects in the bilateral ties are a bit knotty. Naturally Wen avoids going in-depth over contentious political issues.
Then who will discuss the contentious issues, IMO issues are to be discussed when top leaders of the country meet. Not on the Hot-line which is set-up. I think the new leadership in China would be even more aggressive towards achieving that "Superpower" status.
 

amoy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
5,982
Likes
1,849
I think the new leadership in China would be even more aggressive towards achieving that "Superpower" status.
to a degree I agree with u. now Deng's "keep a low profile" or "bide our time" are being challenged as an ostrich policy as evidenced in Diaoyu Islands clash, and Korean issue.
 

IBM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Messages
193
Likes
1
we just can't trust the chinese. First They said hindi chini bhai- bhai now what????
 

amoy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
5,982
Likes
1,849
First They said hindi chini bhai- bhai now what
we don't speak hindi - I mean u can't take what's taught in india for granted
 

SHASH2K2

New Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
5,711
Likes
730

Finally, it was the P-word that popped up as a roadblock. Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao's response to the issues India considers its "core concerns" was perceived by his hosts as inadequate even though his visit yielded significant success in the area of bilateral trade. New Delhi had pushed hard for including a reference to Jammu & Kashmir as an integral part of India in the joint statement. But the Chinese side was unwilling because of their sensitivities towards Pakistan.

On the issue of terrorism, New Delhi conveyed its concerns over Pakistan-based terror outfits, but here, too, the joint statement, which committed both sides to fighting terrorism, didn't mention the 26/11 attack or terrorism emanating from Pakistan soil.

Wen is scheduled to visit Pakistan on Friday following his trip to India.

Addressing the media after the meeting between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Wen at Hyderabad House — their 11th over the past few years — foreign secretary Nirupama Rao, who described the talks as "open and candid", said: "Our concerns about terrorism emanating from Pakistani soil were expressed" during delegation-level talks.

In a firm response to the Chinese rebuff on J&K, India refused to include the usual mention of the "one China principle" and "Tibet Autonomous Region as part of the territory of the People's Republic of China" in the joint statement.

Wen, whose trip was expected to normalise relations between the two countries, which have spent the last year-and-a-half sparring over issues ranging from Beijing's claims over Arunachal Pradesh to the damming of the Brahmaputra to reported incursions by Chinese soldiers into Indian territory, failed to allay New Delhi's concerns that Beijing is increasingly subscribing to Islamabad's position on Kashmir.

Though the issue of China issuing stapled visas for Kashmir residents is likely to get resolved soon, concerns over Chinese aid for projects in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir and Beijing's stand on Kashmir being a disputed territory rankle New Delhi.

"The need is there for China to look at India's concerns. The fact is that only when terrorism is addressed will we have a stable region. It affects China also," Rao said, adding that the Chinese premier had expressed sympathy for the victims of the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack.
 

Pintu

New Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Messages
12,082
Likes
348
http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/india-rejects-trade-pact-cites-\trade-imbalance\/418646/

India rejects trade pact, cites 'trade imbalance'
Jyoti Malhotra / New Delhi December 17, 2010, 1:28 IST

India refused to enter into any discussions on a regional trading arrangement (RTA) with China, even though it was raised by Chinese premier Wen Jiabao at talks with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Hyderabad House this morning. The PM said the time was not ripe because of the severe "imbalance" that existed in the $50-billion trade this year.

However, both sides agreed to put out the public positive spin, saying they were buoyed by the large number of agreements between their private companies yesterday and had, therefore, decided to double the existing trade volume to $100 billion by 2015.

A close reading of the joint statement also suggests that the Indian side stood its ground during negotiations with the Chinese delegation in the run-up to premier Wen's visit, and would not agree to the phrase "one-China policy" if Beijing did not reciprocate with phrases on the integrity of Kashmir that would satisfy the Indian government, highly placed sources said.

Instead, the "one-China policy" phrase has been replaced by "mutual respect and sensitivity", language that betrays the diplomatic joust that must have taken place before this compromise was reached.

Business Standard had earlier reported this shift on New Delhi's part to change the jargon that has so far characterised the Sino-Indian relationship, pointing out that the government was determined to protect the integrity and inalienable nature of Jammu & Kashmir, which Beijing had over the last couple of years called into question by issuing only "stapled" visas to J&K residents.

The officials pointed out that in the negotiations, the Indians made clear to the Chinese that they had "Kashmir-related issues" and that China should deal with this "sensitively," just as Beijing had sensitive issues related to Tibet and Taiwan which New Delhi had agreed to abide by.

For the first time since 1988, when former prime minister Rajiv Gandhi went to China for what is now described as a "path-breaking visit," the "one-China policy" phrase has been omitted from a joint communiqué between New Delhi and Beijing.

The officials cautioned against an over-interpretation of the omission, saying this did not mean that India did not recognise the Tibet Autonomous Region as being a part of China, which it did.

"The change in the language is far more significant for its tone, rather than the substance. This indicates that we now have a much more equal conversation," the officials said, admitting that with the Chinese the tonal quality of diplomatic conversation was as important as content.

As for the RTA, which also doesn't find any mention in the joint statement — for the first time since 2005 — Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao went on the offensive on this subject in the concluding minutes of her press conference this afternoon, asking Chinese journalists if they also wanted to ask her a question.

One of them did, on the RTA, wanting to know if the subject had come up in talks between the two prime ministers.

"The Chinese should know," the foreign secretary said, "that there is a big imbalance in the trade and that we (India) would like a little more market access in areas like pharma, agri-products and IT services"¦please take this message to China," she added.

Officials pointed out that trade had touched a $49.5-billion high in October, but of this the Chinese basket was worth $35 billion, while Indian exports only amounted to $15 billion. New Delhi has for some time been pushing Beijing to open its markets, but to no avail.

The Indian assertiveness on the trade and political front was matched by its concessions to the Chinese demands that there be no mention of the Mumbai attacks or the issue of stapled visas in the joint statement, even though the foreign secretary went out of her way to assuage public opinion at the press conference that the subject of terrorism was discussed long and hard between the two prime ministers and that Wen had indeed "expressed great sympathy for the Mumbai attacks and said the Chinese people had felt great concern for the victims of Mumbai".

On the stapled visa issue, Rao said the Chinese premier brought up the matter himself and suggested that officials from both sides meet to discuss the issue and come to a satisfactory conclusion.

Clearly, with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh setting the tone of the Wen visit at his dinner last night, saying that when "India and China, representing more than two and a half billion people speak in one voice, the world listens," government officials said they didn't want to go public with its apprehensions vis-à-vis Beijing.

Premier Wen responded in kind this morning, stating that "through our joint efforts, we will be able to reach important strategic consensus during the visit".

The officials explained the absence of any reference to the Mumbai attacks or Pakistan's hand in the attacks — always unlikely since Wen goes to Islamabad from Delhi and because Pakistan is China's major strategic partner — in the joint statement by admitting that indirect reference to UNSC resolution 1267 which proscribes all those involved in the Mumbai attacks.

As for support for India's permanent membership to the Security Council, Wen reiterated China's earlier positions which says that it "understands India's aspirations" to play a bigger role in the international arena and welcomed India becoming a non-permanent member for the next two years.

The officials admitted that the conversation on reviving defence exchanges, that were put on hold after the visa refusal for J&K army commander Lt Gen B S Jaswal, had not been fully successful, but that both sides had agreed to continue talks on this issue "without restraint".

The joint statement also promises enhanced cooperation on river waters, thereby taking care of India's concerns of the dams that the Chinese are building on the Yarlung Tsangpo (which becomes the Brahmaputra in India), as well as political issues which include freedom of navigation in the Indian Ocean as well as cooperation in Afghanistan.
 

SHASH2K2

New Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
5,711
Likes
730
Looks like India too have few cards up its sleeve.

NEW DELHI: The promise of $100-billion trade between India and China failed to obscure the reality: the two Asian giants remain far apart on fundamental issues, including Kashmir and terror strikes on India from Pakistan territory.

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, on a charm offensive here, said the two countries would strive for a ''strategic consensus'' on issues, while PM Manmohan Singh responded with his own brand of optimism: ''A strong partnership between India and China will contribute to long-term peace, stability, prosperity and development in Asia and the world.''

The verbal warmth was buttressed by signing six bilateral agreements — on culture, green technology, media exchanges, river data and banking, possibly indicating the breadth of issues on which India-China ties have grown.

But behind the warm, fuzzy public atmospherics was a lot of candid, tough talking by India on its core concerns. Maintaining S M Krishna's line that Jammu & Kashmir was integral to India just as Tibet was to China, the China-India joint statement failed to mention India's affirmation of a 'one China' policy — which states that Taiwan and Tibet are part of China. This was a significant first in Indo-Sino ties.

India has been asking China to affirm a one-India policy. Considering China was questioning Kashmir's accession to India, it appears India too has held its hand on a 'one China' policy.

On stapled Chinese visas for Kashmiris — something that has become a clear provocation for India — foreign secretary Nirupama Rao said that Wen raised the issue of stapled visas even before the Indians could. But in typical Chinese style, Wen only agreed to official discussions on it, instead of addressing the irritant. Sources said proof that China might walk back from its current policy would be evident only over time.

India pushed hard on several other issues of concern. Refusing to accept China's demand for a regional trade agreement, India pushed for greater market access for Indian products and services in China. The joint statement promises ''measures to promote greater Indian exports to China with a view to reduce India's trade deficit.''

China remained non-committal on both terrorism from Pakistan and India's bid for a permanent seat at UNSC. Addressing the Indian Council for World Affairs, Wen said both countries had similar views on UNSC reform. In joint statement, China stuck to its old line, ''China attaches great importance to India's status in international affairs as a large developing country, understands and supports India's aspiration to play a greater role in United Nations, including in the Security Council.''

Read more: India declines to affirm 'One China' policy - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...-policy/articleshow/7114778.cms#ixzz18Jdu3900
 

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
5,010
Likes
2,308
Country flag
Ok US is not so great on many other areas these days either. Examples include Financial crisis, two wars about which they are unsure about. EU has got their own flaws of depending on US for security, their internal politics between member countries etc. Not very shining examples IMO.

If we buy stuff worth 50+ billion USD each year from China. What is stopping India from putting tax on those imports to stall that trade by making it unprofitable for them? China might have leverage on US due to various factors.

What is Chinese leverage on India ????
Just to be sure, there is no one here to force india to buy any chinese goods. The only reason you buy our products is that its excellent cost-effectiveness rate. So, if you don't like our product, just leave it and walk away. Simple as that.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top