China says it is opposed to foreign investments in India’s North East

Suryavanshi

Cheeni KLPDhokebaaz
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
16,330
Likes
70,177
We have been neglecting NE states for a long time during Khangress rule, the recent look east policy of Modi has sparked a new hope in me for the future.

Firstly NE could be our very own Switzerland and a major tourist spot both domestic and foreign.
The more jobs there are in the NE lesser will be the insurgency.
Some major steps to be taken in the NE should be-
-Better transport network
By this I mean construction on multiple highways in the region as well as to negotiate a deal with Bangladesh for allowing us to build a road pass through their country in exchange of Access to Nepal.
- More army bases and Military schools in the region with mandatory military Training. This will better prepare them for any threat from China
- Persecution of Jehadi Evangelist that are trying to create a communal rift in the society.
 

brational

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2014
Messages
1,223
Likes
2,644
Country flag
Chini pussy should know that GB & Aksai Chin is Indian Territory. There is nothing undisputed about Aruachal Pradesh. If they have issues with border alignment, sit down and discuss, get it resolved.

How long will they act as a sub standard power in Asia? More such Dolam dose required to keep these pussies fkd.
 

aliyah

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2015
Messages
698
Likes
843
china seems to have got infected with very deadly brain eating virus called Pakistan :)
this virus is very very dangerous soon it Will create a population of brain dead ppls :) :)
 

sorcerer

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
26,919
Likes
98,471
Country flag
Why Japan is pouring lakhs of crores in cut-rate loans to build infrastructure across India

I have a hidden agenda,” says Takema Sakamoto with a naughty grin. Dressed in kurtapyjama, paired with a half-jacket, he speaks fluent English, talks generously and is comfortable in his skin talking to the media — unlike most Japanese expats.

Sakamoto is the chief representative of JICA (Japanese International Cooperation Agency), and is talking about shifting to a new upgraded office this July. “We have a lot of Japanese expats. We needed better security.” For years, JICA functioned out of a dingy office at Gopaldas Bhawan in Connaught Place in central Delhi. It now operates out of the relatively swankier HT House on Kasturba Gandhi Marg — with better security.

There is another reason — Sakamoto’s hidden agenda — for the office shift. “We are the biggest bilateral donor body in India. We needed an appropriate office. A modern office to give a thrust to our presence in India,” he says candidly.





JICA is today the largest bilateral donor agency in India, having disbursed over Rs 1.5 lakh crore of soft loans to India since 2007-08. Out of 150 countries that JICA operates in, India is its biggest donee. “India has been the largest since 2008. But we have become much closer since 2015. We are now upgrading our older relationship to a newer and a very special one,” he says.

That new chapter in the India-Japan relationship was playing out in full glory in Gujarat this week. Amid hype and hope, Gandhinagar played host to the blossoming bromance between Japan’s PM Shinzo Abe and his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi. The stage was set for some big-ticket project announcements. A Rs 1.1 lakh crore Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train — for which Japan will dole out Rs 88,000 crore as soft loan — has grabbed most headlines. (Ironically, feasibility studies on the bullet train were done by the UPA government.) A part of the Make in India plan, the project will create jobs, entail technology transfer and local manufacturing. “Very quietly, JICA has surpassed World Bank and ADB in seamlessly executing large infrastructure projects in India,” says Vinayak Chatterjee, chairman, Feedback Infra.




The bullet train may be the most eye-catching but JICA’s spread is deep and wide. India-Japan will cooperate to connect Africa, Southeast Asia and India’s Northeast as part of the $40 billion Asia-Africa Growth Corridor (AAGC) programme, a counter to China’s Belt and Road Initiative.

Deepening security and defence ties is high on the priority list. While the deal on US-2 amphibious aircraft has not yet stitched, discussions around unmanned ground vehicles, robotics, developing smart islands (think Andaman & Nicobar), among others, made headlines. Japan pledged support for infrastructure projects in the Northeast. The two countries signed 15 agreements in a range of areas, including infrastructure, skill development, security and disaster management. A project to build a convention centre in Varanasi has been cleared.




Investment Boost

Away from the media glare, on the ground there was some serious business afoot, with both JICA and Jetro ( Japan External Trade Organisation) playing a critical role. Some 450 Japanese honchos congregated at the Gandhinagar summit earlier this week, 250 of whom had flown down from Japan. The biggest shots included Mitsubishi Heavy Industries CEO and president Shunichi Miyanaga, Hitachi executive chairman Hiroaki Nakanishi, Suzuki Motor’s Osamu Suzuki, Sadayuki Sakakibara, chairman of Keidanren or the Japan Business Federation, Mitsui board chairman Masami Iijima, and Toyota Motor vice-chairman of board Shigeru Hayakawa. “An important trend this time was a big presence of executives from medium-sized ($1-10 billion) Japanese companies,” says a senior industry executive present at the summit in Gandhinagar on condition of anonymity.




DIPP and its Japanese counterpart have signed an agreement to promote Japanese investments in India. About 15 Japanese firms have signed agreements to invest in Gujarat. This includes Suzuki Motor’s plan to expand capacity, manufacture e-vehicles and set up a lithium-ion battery factory with Denso and Toshiba. Over 10 Japanese industrial townships are to be built in four states, including Gujarat and Rajasthan. There are plans to set up four Japan-India Institutes for Manufacturing ( JIMs) to train workers. 106 new waterways are to be jointly developed. Some serious discussions are on to work together on Iran’s Chabahar port and infrastructure projects in South Vietnam’s Mekong Delta region.




Hype or Truth

It’s not difficult to find sceptics to punch holes in the grand India-Japan spectacle. Some in the political circles call it the Bullet Election Train, as the summit precedes the upcoming Gujarat election. But there may be other more solid reasons for doubt. Consider: India’s bilateral trade with Japan is minuscule and, in fact, has been declining since the Modi government came to power in 2014. India’s exports to Japan have almost halved from $6.81 billion in 2013-14 to $3.85 billion in 2016-17. Imports from Japan, too, have fallen from a high of $12.5 billion in 2012-13 to $9.63 billion in 2016-17. As a result, bilateral trade has dipped from $18.61 billion in 2012-13 to $13.48 billion in 2016-17. This is despite the signing of the India-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership in 2011.




For perspective, India-Japan bilateral trade constitutes just around 1% of Japan’s total trade whereas for India it is a little over 2% of India’s total trade. This is in sharp contrast to bilateral trade ties with China, which is today India’s largest trade partner. Though skewed in China’s favour, India-China bilateral trade stood at $61.3 billion in 2016-17 with India’s export to China at $10.2 billion. Similarly, Japan’s trade ties with China are more robust. In 2016, Japan exported $113.9 billion (17.7% of its exports) to China and imported $156.6 billion with a trade deficit of -$42.7 billion.




Perhaps foreign direct investment (FDI) from Japan, which has been on the rise, may be a better proxy for the warm ties. From around $512 million in 2006, it today hovers around $4.7 billion. It more than doubled between 2013 and 2014 when it stood at $1.7 billion.

Japan-based Yoshihisa Tani, executive officer at Team Pasona, who till last year headed its India office, offers a ringside view. “The years 2015 and 2016 were not good. Japanese companies focused on Asean markets instead of India,” he says. Team Pasona is an HR consultancy that offers training and recruitment services to mostly Japan-headquartered MNCs. In Japan, language is a huge barrier, especially in services sectors like IT. “China has more than 2 million Japanese-speaking workers while India has just 20,000,” says a Delhi-based senior executive at an industry association. “Triggered by NTTDocomo and Ranbaxy-Daiichi (partnerships that ended bitterly), Japanese companies had turned wary about India. That is changing. Today, there is a greater willingness and confidence in India,” says Rohit Berry, partner (lead Japan corridor), KPMG India.




Sun Finally Rising?

Driven right from the top — by the two PMs — change seems to be afoot. The big focus is on capacity-building at every level — institutional, governmental and even workforce. “We are looking at real goals where we build good-quality projects that are stable, safe and sustainable,” says JICA’s Sakamoto. Bullet train — or Shinkansen as it is called in Japan — is a difficult project with very high safety and punctuality standards.

In the Northeast, 10 JICA experts are working on the ground, preparing manuals and masterplans for sustainable agriculture. While it is training state government officials to build capacity for project implementation, plans are afoot to send small batches of officials to Japan for in-class training. Working with siloed departments, JICA is fostering interdepartmental collaboration by being the bridge. Capacitybuilding and a mindset change seem to be recurrent themes. The latter revolves around developing habits such as not just building but also making people use public toilets, overall cleanliness, punctuality and safety. “We are happy to be a catalyst for change. We lend but we are not a bank. We want to see deeper change,” Sakamoto says.

Sandeep Singh, managing director of Tata Hitachi Construction Machinery, can feel it first-hand. Earlier this year, the Japanese government queried about his company’s training programmes for unemployed youth, outside of their own internal training programme for customers, vendors and the like. “We got the message that it is not enough. They insisted that Japanese firms like us train youth,” he says. This was followed up seriously until Singh committed to training 30 youth annually for in-demand skills like welding. “I was happy to see the seriousness. The Japanese government doesn’t take anything lightly. They have hired an agency to see this gets done,” he says.

Many other programmes are underway to boost bilateral economic ties. Six months ago, Japan rolled out its JITCO programme in India to help tackle manpower shortage in Japanese firms here. It is focused on ITI-trained, blue-collar workers, who will be taught hard and soft skills and will be sent to Japan for a three-year, on-the-job training programme. The first batch of 15 workers has just been placed in Japan and the plan is to send 500 workers in the first year.

Japan has tried its trinity development model — focused on aid, investment and trade — in many Asian countries like South Korea, Thailand and Malaysia. “… though not acknowledged by Beijing, Japan played a critical role in China’s development,” says Purnendra Jain, head, department of Asian studies, University of Adelaide. “Japan’s aid policy has almost become a model for new donors and is now appreciated by others like OECD, which were critical of its aid policy in the past,” he adds.

The two governments are talking about training and sending nurses to Japan. As part of the Look East policy, this programme will be focused on the Northeast where caregivers will be trained for Japan. In the CEO’s forum in Tokyo in 2016, there was an announcement to make the movie Love in Tokyo 2. Japan National Tourism Organisation recently set up its first India office in Delhi and Japan has announced the production of Love in Tokyo 2 to be directed by Imtiaz Ali.

On the ground, it seems the tide is beginning to turn. Japan Inc is putting money where its mouth is. “In Japan, we hear, the message to companies (from the government) is you should go to India,” says Tani of Team Pasona, whose India business is growing at over 20% annually. Says Berry of KPMG: “Japanese go slow. Step by step. But once they move they are there for the long term. They are extremely dependable and reliable partners.” Beyond automobiles, Japanese firms — especially midsized — are entering new sectors, including tractors, agrochemicals, real estate, construction, defence, infrastructure.

“India has stood by us in difficult times. It is our turn now. If you have a need, we are happy to support,” says Sakamoto. It, however, may not be an entirely one-way street. If India is getting loans at rock-bottom rates, don’t forget that Bank of Japan is providing no-interest funds to banks to encourage them to lend. Also, the loan for the bullet train is conditional on India sourcing 30% of the project (by value) from Japan. Playing a role in India’s ascent also helps Tokyo assert itself in the neighbourhood at a time when China is flexing its muscle.

When two countries cooperate, more often than not, it is for mutual benefit. India-Japan cooperation may be no different, although the next-generation technology that India gets in a cost-effective manner may ensure it is a substantial gainer.

Four Marquee Projects





BULLET TRAIN
: Inaugurated earlier this week, JICA will provide Rs 88,000 crore to the Rs 1.1 lakh crore high-speed rail corridor between Ahmedabad and Mumbai. It will cover 508 km in 127 minutes. The project construction will create 24,000 direct and indirect jobs. To be completed by 2022, it will entail technology transfer and local manufacturing of key components.





NORTHEAST
: Amid the standoff with China in Doklam, Japan is helping India with its Look East policy. A Rs 4,000 crore project to build highways and bridges and Rs 900 crore for hydro projects will help boost connectivity and infrastructure in the region, much to Chinese displeasure. Other projects are in the works like smart city, a biodiversity initiative in Sikkim and forest resource management in Tripura.





DELHI METRO
: JICA introduced India to a world-class metro rail through DMRC in the 1990s. It funded 60% of Phase 1 of the project. Trains and stations that are friendly to women and the disabled coupled with a thrust on cleanliness and punctuality set new standards for the railways. Today, metro networks are either operational or being constructed in nine Indian cities with the government seeing scope for them in 50 more Indian cities.





DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR
: JICA is partnering in India’s largest railway project, the Rs 81,459 crore Dedicated Freight Corridor (DFC), which will lead to faster movement of goods and will be completed by 2019. While the World Bank is funding the Eastern DFC, JICA’s Rs 38,722 crore loan will fund the Western DFC.

Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...ofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
 

Chinmoy

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
8,816
Likes
22,897
Country flag
In the mean time in Assam.....

Assam Farmers’ Rights Leader Akhil Gogoi Arrested on Sedition Charges

https://thewire.in/177373/assam-farmers-rights-leader-akhil-gogoi-arrested-sedition-charges/

He is the sole responsible person for delaying the Lower Subansiri HEP with 2k MW output. He is against any such mega HEP or any expert committee which gives a work around for these issues.
He is against any eviction drive carried out by government around any National park or reserve forest.
He is always silent on power shortage faced by people in Assam.
He is always silent on any sort of Rhino poaching or illegal hunting in KNP or Manas or anywhere else. But his picture would always be there with some foreigners enjoying the beauty of Orchids in vicinity of KNP.
He would always be the one to instigate people in rally, but be the first to be out of the sight before any police action happens.

BTW, current attitude of North Easterners to China........


tenor.gif
 

vinuzap

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2016
Messages
509
Likes
693
http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/the-case-for-alliance/

The case for alliance
Rise of China and uncertainty over America’s role in Asia has brought Japan and India closer. Modi and Abe can overcome the bureaucratic inertia that limits the relationship’s possibilities.

That Japan was the only nation to extend public support to India during the Doklam confrontation with China is symbolic of the extraordinary transformation of relations between the two Asian powers over the last few years. Two decades ago, in the aftermath of India’s nuclear tests, Tokyo was at the forefront of the international condemnation and the imposition of collective economic measures against Delhi.

Today it is quite tempting to suggest that Japan has come closest to being India’s natural ally in Asia. Purists will certainly question the idea of an “alliance” between India and Japan. India’s international identity, after all, has long been articulated in terms of “non-alignment”. Japan, in contrast, swears by its lone alliance with the United States.
The emerging Asian dynamic, however, suggests that Delhi and Tokyo must necessarily draw closer. Whether the relationship between Delhi and Tokyo will eventually approximate to an alliance is likely to be determined less by tradition and more by the current convulsions in their shared Asian and Indo-Pacific geography.

Two factors are threatening to unravel the post-war order in Asia. One is the rapid rise of China and the other is the growing uncertainty over America’s future role in Asia. Nearly 40 years of accelerated economic growth has helped China inch closer to the aggregate GDP of the United States. Purposeful military modernisation over the last few decades has given Beijing levers to contest US military dominance over Asia.

As China closes the gap with the US, the imbalance between Beijing and its Asian neighbours has grown massively. Rising China has dethroned Japan as the number one economic power in Asia. It has also shattered the broad parity with India that existed until the 1980s. China’s GDP is now five times larger than that of India. Beijing outspends Delhi and Tokyo on defence by more than four times.

According to the London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies, China’s defence budget ($216 billion) is more than twice that of India ($56 billion) and Japan ($46 billion) put together. As they wake up to strategic diminution vis-a-vis China, India and Japan are also buffeted by the unprecedented political turbulence in the United States. President Donald Trump is challenging the two foundations of America’s post-war primacy in Asia — the willingness to act as the market for Asian goods and bearing the main burden of defending its allies in the region, including Japan.

There is undoubtedly much resistance from the establishment in Washington to Trump’s heresies on free trade and Eurasian alliances. But the tussle in Washington has begun to induce both Delhi and Tokyo not to take America’s political trajectory in Asia for granted. As they cope with China’s assertiveness, India and Japan also worry about the consequences of a potential American retrenchment or a deliberate decision in Washington to cede more space to Beijing in Asia.

While they hope for an enduring American role in stabilising Asia, Delhi and Tokyo also need to insure against wild oscillations in US policy. One way of doing that is to move towards a genuine alliance between India and Japan. America may have no objections to such an alliance. It has, in fact, actively encouraged closer cooperation between Delhi and Tokyo.

A potential alliance between India and Japan can neither replace the American might nor contain China. As Beijing’s neighbours, Delhi and Tokyo have a big stake in a cooperative relationship with Beijing and at the same time a strong incentive to temper some of China’s unilateralism through a regional balance of power system.

While the objective case for an alliance is evident, can Delhi and Tokyo overcome their strategic inertia and take the necessary subjective decisions? To be sure, Delhi and Tokyo have come a long way since the tensions over India’s nuclear tests in the late 1990s. But there is much distance to go before they can showcase at least an alliance-like relationship.

Successive prime ministers in Delhi and Tokyo contributed to this transformation. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who is in Ahmedabad this week for the annual summit with the Indian PM, deserves special credit. During his brief first tenure as PM during 2006-07, Abe outlined the broad framework for a strong strategic partnership with India.

Luckily for India, Abe has had a rare second shot at leading Japan since late 2012. He achieved the near impossible by getting the Japanese bureaucratic establishment to negotiate a civil nuclear cooperation agreement with India and the political class to approve it. The conventional wisdom until recently was that Japan’s “nuclear allergy” will never allow Tokyo cooperate with India on atomic energy. On his part, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had put Japan at the very top of his foreign policy agenda. Like Abe, Modi continuously nudged the Indian establishment to think more strategically about cooperation with Japan — from high speed railway development to the modernisation of transport infrastructure in the Northeast.

Under Abe and Modi, Tokyo and Delhi have expanded their maritime security cooperation, agreed to work together in promoting connectivity and infrastructure in third countries in India’s neighbourhood. They are pooling their resources — financial and human — to develop the Asia-Africa Growth Corridor
While all this is impressive, sceptics will argue that without a significant defence relationship, the talk of an alliance between India and Japan remains meaningless. Although military exchanges between Delhi and Tokyo have expanded over the last few years, the two sides are far from a credible defence partnership that can shape the regional security architecture in the coming decades.

That negotiations on India’s purchase of Japanese amphibious aircraft, US-2i, have been stuck for years underlines part of the problem. The time is now for Modi and Abe to demonstrate that they can overcome the bureaucratic inertia that limits the defence possibilities between India and Japan. Modi and Abe have certainly raised the expectations for a potential alliance between Delhi and Tokyo. But they can’t afford to fall short on implementation amidst the current geopolitical churn in Asia


 

vinuzap

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2016
Messages
509
Likes
693
https://warontherocks.com/2017/09/southern-asia-is-heating-up-an-indian-perspective/

GURMEET KANWAL
SEPTEMBER 13, 2017



Editor’s Note: This is the sixth installment of “Southern (Dis)Comfort,” a new series from War on the Rocks and the Stimson Center. The series seeks to unpack the dynamics of intensifying competition — military, economic, diplomatic — in Southern Asia, principally between China, India, Pakistan, and the United States. Catch up on the rest of the series.

Strife-torn Southern Asia is the second most unstable region in the world after West Asia. India has unresolved territorial disputes with both China and Pakistan. As the Line of Actual Control with China has not been demarcated, there are frequent patrol face-offs. A major standoff, that lasted over two months (mid-June to late August 2017) at the India-Bhutan-China tri-boundary region, has been resolved, but could flare up again. Though there is a cease-fire on the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir, of late it is being observed more in the breach. China colludes with Pakistan in the nuclear warhead, ballistic missile, and military hardware fields. This has emboldened Pakistan’s deep state — the army and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Directorate — to sponsor terrorism as an instrument of state policy to destabilise Jammu and Kashmir and attack cities in India through mercenary jihadists. A large-scale terrorist strike in future, similar to the attacks on the Indian Parliament in December 2001 and at Mumbai in November 2008, could lead to war.

The unresolved territorial disputes and repeated terrorist attacks have the potential to trigger conflict, which may not remain limited. India, China, and Pakistan are nuclear-armed states and a miscalculation during conflict may result in rapid escalation to nuclear exchanges. Also, given the Chinese-Pakistani collusion, India is likely to be confronted with a two-front situation during a future conflict with either of them. To navigate the emerging instability in Southern Asia and shifting adversarial relationships with Pakistan and China, India will need to intensify its third most consequential relationship — its strategic partnership with the United States.

India-Pakistan Relations: Stuck in a Groove

Though an ugly stability has prevailed for some time, new risks are emerging in the Indian-Pakistani relationship. The situation demands that India strengthen its military capabilities while deepening U.S engagement. Despite grave provocation from Pakistan over the last three decades, India has consistently observed strategic restraint to keep the level of conflict low so as not to hamper Indian economic growth. However, two attacks by ISI-sponsored terrorists forced India to retaliate assertively. The first was an attack on the Pathankot Air Base in January 2016, a week after Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi made a bold, unscheduled halt in Lahore in a bid to meet Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and reach out to the leadership of Pakistan. The second was on a military camp at Uri near the Line of Control in September 2016.

Taking the Pakistan Army completely by surprise, Indian Special Forces launched multiple surgical strikes across the Line of Control and caused extensive damage. In a one-night operation, six to eight teams crossed the Line of Control at several points over a wide front and destroyed terrorist launch pads in the near vicinity of the line. Regular Pakistani Army soldiers at these launch pads are also likely to have been killed or injured. The strikes had a salutary effect and infiltration levels dropped sharply in the months that followed.

India’s new policy is clearly to maintain a posture of tactical assertiveness under the umbrella of strategic restraint. The aim is to raise the cost for the Pakistan Army and the ISI for waging their war for Kashmir through asymmetric means. The level of the punishment inflicted and the caliber of the weapons employed for the purpose are likely to be raised with each new provocation until the cost becomes prohibitive for the Pakistan Army and the ISI. In case there is a major terrorist attack in India in future and there is credible evidence of the involvement of the organs of the Pakistani state, stronger military retaliation is likely.

The impact of the deterioration in relations is that the “ugly” stability prevailing in Southern Asia has been further undermined. A miscalculation on either side could lead to conventional conflict with nuclear undertones. India’s political leaders and the armed forces believe there is space for conventional conflict below the nuclear threshold. For now, tactical assertiveness under an umbrella of strategic restraint remains the favored approach. However, the Indian public’s patience is wearing thin and its willingness to countenance escalation as an appropriate response to terrorism may be increasing. These domestic pressures, combined with the army’s ongoing search for a limited-war strategy and military modernization, could lead New Delhi to give sanction to proactive offensive operations along the lines of Cold Start in the event of another terrorist-initiated spark. The belief in Western capitals is that conventional conflict between India and Pakistan could rapidly escalate to nuclear exchanges. India’s consideration of escalatory, Cold Start-like operations — and Pakistan’s development of tactical nuclear weapons and its plans to neutralize India’s superiority in conventional military forces through their early use — fuel these concerns.

India-China Relations: Clash of Worldviews

The Indian-Chinese relationship has been stable at the strategic level, but marked by political, diplomatic, and military instability at the tactical level. However, the modus vivendi that has managed relations for decades appears to be fraying. An enhanced U.S.-Indian relationship can help manage deepening Chinese-Pakistani ties.

Besides the long-standing territorial dispute between the two countries, transgressions across the Line of Actual Control by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) are frequent despite the Border Peace and Tranquillity Agreement(1993) and several other accords, all of which forbid such activities. As was well reported, India and China wereembroiled in a contest of wills in the India-Bhutan-China tri-boundary over the summer. The crisis started when the Indian Army crossed into territory disputed by Bhutan and China to stop PLA soldiers from constructing a motorable road toward a Bhutan Army outpost. In contrast to past border disputes involving India and China, Beijing insistedNew Delhi had intervened across a settled international boundary and, therefore, had to withdraw its forces before negotiations could commence. As it was unfolding, Indian strategic thinkers interpreted the incident as no less than an attempt by Beijing to force New Delhi to “acknowledge the power disparity between the two sides and show appropriate deference to China.”

China refuses to allow Masood Azhar, the founder of the Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammad — a U.N.-designated terrorist group — be designated as a terrorist by the U.N. sanctions committee. It has blocked India’s membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group as it wants simultaneous entry for Pakistan, one of the world’s worst proliferators. China objects every time an Indian political leader visits Arunachal Pradesh — an Indian state that it claims — and even lodged a protest at the visit of the Dalai Lama to a monastery in the state.

The China-Pakistan relationship has been described by both as an “all-weather friendship.” The collusion between the two states has deepened with the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) beginning to take shape. CPEC is part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative that seeks to extend China’s strategic outreach deep into the Indo-Pacific region, giving a fillip to its flagging economy by generating large-scale construction activity and creating new markets for its products. Passing through the disputed territories of Gilgit-Baltistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, the $54 billion project will link Xingjiang Province of China with Gwadar Port on the Makran Coast west of Karachi. New Delhi fears that the presence of PLA personnel in Pakistan in large numbers to protect CPEC and related investments could further vitiate the security environment.

Stabilizing Influence: Indo-U.S. Strategic Partnership

The Indo-U.S. defense relationship has witnessed a remarkable rise in recent years. During his tenure at the Pentagon’s helm, Ash Carter memorably remarked that the Indo-U.S. relationship was “destined to be one of the most significant partnerships of the 21st century.” These sentiments, widespread in New Delhi and Washington, have led to concrete advances, such as the conclusion of a Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement and India’s designation as a Major Defense Partner of the United States.

Some expectations on both sides are yet to be met. For instance, India has not signed the Communication and Information Security Memorandum of Agreement or the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement, which the Pentagon says must be concluded before Washington would be able to establish encrypted communication links with New Delhi and share sensitive data, such as targeting information, during both peacetime and crisis scenarios. Nevertheless, the overall trend in the relationship is clear, with defense trade between the two powers totalling more than $10 billion over the last decade. The partnership is likely to gradually rise to the next level, including joint threat assessment, joint contingency planning, and joint operations when the vital national interests of both countries are threatened.

Washington is also well-positioned to help New Delhi deal with the emerging competitive realities of its strategic environment.

One of the motivations behind this growing strategic partnership is to provide a hedge for both against what is increasingly being perceived as China’s not-so-peaceful rise. In case China behaves irresponsibly and uses military force somewhere in the Indo-Pacific, both India and the United States will need a strong partnership to manage the consequences. American support is essential to the revitalization of Indian military power, whether through arms sales, technology transfers, or co-production of weapons systems, all of which are on the table. The Doka La standoff serves as a reminder that India can ill afford to continue lagging in terms of the pace and scope of its defense-modernization process. Ties to the United States must also be leveraged in countering Beijing’s provocative diplomatic and military maneuvers. Washington has been steadfast in its support for New Delhi’s bid for NSG membership and Azhar’s designation as a global terrorist despite Beijing’s intransigence. It has also bolstered Indian naval capabilities via maritime exercises such as Malabar and the sale of maritime surveillance and anti-submarine platforms that are essential for tracking and countering China’s presence in the Indian Ocean.

The United States could also work with India to mitigate dangers emanating from Pakistan. Washington’s maintenance of ties to Rawalpindi is predicated upon ensuring that nuclear warheads never fall into jihadist hands. U.S.-Pakistani cooperation on nuclear security serves Indian interests, but there are other areas in which Washington could be a better friend to New Delhi.

First, the United States could help India bolster its standoff strike and surveillance capabilities along the Indo-Pakistani border. Israel has already offered India armed drones. The prospective sale of U.S.-made, unarmed Sea Guardian drones signals that intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance is a priority area of collaboration. Persistent American concerns that such transfers could violate its nonproliferation obligations under the Missile Technology Control Regime may be on the wane. Equally important, the United States could put more pressure on Pakistan to cease its support to anti-Indian terrorists. Washington’s decision last year to withhold $300 million from Rawalpindi in military reimbursements, the debate in policy circles as to whether the United States should designate Pakistan a state sponsor of terrorism, and the Modi-Trump joint statement’s emphasis on stopping “cross-border terrorist attacks perpetrated by Pakistan-based groups” are indicators of a potential New Delhi-Washington convergence on Pakistan. Resurgent India is now at a breakout moment in its history. As a status-quo power that has shunned military alliances and maintained its strategic autonomy, India is being gradually propelled by China’s military assertiveness to hedge its bets, especially by courting deeper ties to Washington. India must reassert its primacy in Southern Asia by looking and acting outwards. It is India’s manifest destiny to play a leading role in shaping the emerging order in the Indo-Pacific region.



Gurmeet Kanwal is Distinguished Fellow, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA), New Delhi and Adjunct Fellow, Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Washington, D.C.
 

vayuu1

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2015
Messages
1,031
Likes
1,765
Country flag
China says it is opposed to foreign investments in India’s North East
Friday, September 15, 2017 By: Live Mint Source Link: CLICK HERE






China on Friday said it is opposed to any foreign investments including that from Japan in India’s North East region and is against any third party’s involvement in resolving its border disputes with India.

Reacting to Japan’s plans to step up investments in the northeastern states during Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s visit to India, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying told the media that China is opposed to any foreign investment in the “disputed areas”.

“You also mentioned Act East policy. You must be clear that the boundary of India and China border area has not been totally delimited. We have disputes on the eastern section of the boundary,” she said.

“We are now trying to seek a solution through negotiations that is acceptable to both sides. Under such circumstances, various parties should respect such aspects and any third party should not be involved in our efforts to resolve the disputes,” she said.

China claims Arunachal Pradesh as southern Tibet.

Hua said there was no mention of China anywhere in the India-Japan joint statement nor she has seen any “innuendoes” referred to Beijing as stated by the media.

“To be frank we are also closely following the Japanese Prime Minister’s visit to India. I read the joint statement carefully but I have not found the statement mentioned the term China at all,” she said.

About the references to Indo-Pacific, which included South China Sea in the joint statement and calls for the countries to resolve the disputes peacefully, she said the statement mentioned disputes to be resolved through dialogue.

“We know that to resolve the disputes the directly concerned parties have to uphold the rights to freedom of navigation, over flights entitled to countries under international law. This is China’s position,” she said.

In indirect reference to Japan, she said, “We also hope various parties can uphold the rights to freedom of navigation of over flights by countries in various waters.”

China and Japan have dispute over the uninhabited islands called Senkakus by Japan and Diaoyu islands by China in the East China Sea where naval ships of both the countries aggressively patrol the waters around the islands.

About the connectivity projects, and implicit criticism of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), Hua said, “I haven’t seen any innuendoes. I have not seen that”.

Hua hoped that close ties between India and Japan is conducive to the regional peace and stability.

“I should also add that the India and Japan are important countries in Asia. We hope the normal development of the relationship can be conducive to regional, peace and development and play a constructive role in this process,” she said.

http://www.defencenews.in/article/C...eign-investments-in-India’s-North-East-313836

@IndianHawk @Willy2 @roma @Krusty @Defcon 1 @Ghanteshwar @raheel besharam @raja696 @Amr @AnkitPurohit @Akshay_Fenix @aditya10r @airtel @aditya10r @ancientIndian @Bahamut @Berkut @Bornubus @Bengal_Tiger @ersakthivel @FRYCRY @Gessler @HariSud @hit&run @hardip @indiandefencefan @IndianHawk @JayPatel @Kshatriya87 @LETHALFORCE @Mikesingh @NavneetKundu @OneGrimPilgrim @pmaitra @PaliwalWarrior @Pulkit @smestarz @SakalGhareluUstad @Srinivas_K @ShashankSharma @Superdefender @Screambowl @TacticalFrog @Abhijat @A chauhan @Alien @alphacentury @Ancient Indian @Ankit Purohit @anupamsurey @armyofhind @Bharat Ek Khoj @Bhumihar @blueblood @brational @Bangalorean @Blackwater @Bornubus @bose @Bullet @cobra commando @DingDong @DFI_COAS @dhananjay1 @ersakthivel @F-14B @fooLIam @gpawar @guru-dutt @here2where @hit&run @HariPrasad-1 @Indx TechStyle @Kshatriya87 @jackprince @Kharavela @Illusive @I_PLAY_BAD @LETHALFORCE @Lions Of Punjab @maomao @Mad Indian @OneGrimPilgrim @Peter @piKacHHu @Pinky Chaudhary @porky_kicker @Razor @raja696 @Rowdy @Sakal Gharelu Ustad @SanjeevM @saty @sydsnyper @Srinivas_K @Screambowl @sorcerer @Simple_Guy @Sylex21 @wickedone @tarunraju @TrueSpirit2 @thethinker @Tshering22 @vayuu1 @VIP @Vishwarupa @VIP @Varahamihira @Navnit Kundu @WARREN SS @Willy2 @3deffect
Chinks can say whatever they want we don't give a rat @$$ .

Sent from my vivo 1601 using Tapatalk
 

desicanuk

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2011
Messages
527
Likes
686
who cares ?

Indian also bring the sovereignty of occupied TIBET and EAST TURKESTAN into bilateral negotiation...

Unless China agrees ONE INDIA there will be no reciprocity to ONE CHINA
Tibet,East Turkestan.......Dont forget Inner Mongolia!These are all colonies that need be freed from that
neo-colonial imperialist bourgeoise fascist state called PRC.
As for PRC statement regarding investment in our North East -:bs:
 

Kalki_2018

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2017
Messages
720
Likes
1,253
Country flag
china is preparing to be humiliated again. India already has plans to scupper any cpec through PoK or Balochistan.
 

sorcerer

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
26,919
Likes
98,471
Country flag
How India and Japan rattled China with Act northeast policy

Any summit India has with a major power these days necessarily has China-related strategic components. The annual India-Japan summit goes a step further as most decisions are triggered by the China factor. Various agreements inked by the two sides — wholly bilateral and unrelated with China — are aimed at taking their relationship to a higher trajectory in order to send a message to the Dragon.

At the recently-concluded 12th edition of the India-Japan summit in Gujarat's Gandhinagar, the two allies' prime ministers, Narendra Modi and Shinzo Abe, took several decisions to further consolidate their strategic partnership — to stand up to China together.

The very title of the joint statement released following the Modi-Abe talks — "Towards a free, open and prosperous Indo-Pacific” — itself, in many ways, hints at the China-related agenda and the broad thrust of the discussions that the two prime ministers had. For a change, there was no specific mention of South China Sea, but the usage of the larger geopolitical location “Indo-Pacific” in the joint statement subsumes South China Sea and sets the new template of India-Japan, indicating their thrust area will be much larger.

The two prime ministers participating in the ground-breaking ceremony of India’s first ever bullet train (Japan's first bullet train became operational 53 years ago) was the biggest takeaway from Abe's India visit in terms of optics. The $16 billion project, set to see the 508km Ahmedabad-Mumbai bullet train running from 2022, is largely funded by a soft loan from Japan at an unbelievably low interest rate of 0.1 percent, repayable in 50 years.

This has enormous political significance for PM Modi. The very fact that Abe stayed in Ahmedabad and Gandhinagar alone during his two-day visit and that the Indian PM ensured the foreign dignitary's itinerary didn’t even include New Delhi — an unrecedented event — showed how Modi milked this visit politically by keeping Abe in poll-bound Gujarat.

The bullet train project will be useful optics for the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in Gujarat, which is due for Assembly elections in two months.

Modi and his brigade will also extract maximum political mileage from the bullet train project in the general elections, due by May 2019 but set to be advanced by around six months if the BJP wins Gujarat.

But apart from the optics, the Abe visit will be best-remembered for a China-specific strategic agenda: the two sides agreed to intensify their defence ties and the joint statement specifically mentioned the progress made on Japan selling the US-2 amphibian aircraft to India, the next big milestone between Asia's number two and number three economies after they signed the landmark civil nuclear deal in 2016.

This will irk China no end as the Japanese are not known to export defence equipment and once the US-2 deal is inked, it will inevitably open up the floodgates for more state-of-the-art defence exports from Tokyo to New Delhi.

However, the biggest red rag for the Chinese is India's bold decision to rope in the Japanese in the northeast's infrastructure development, which found mention for the first time in their joint statement following the summit.


Foreign secretary S Jaishankar succinctly underlined the Indo-Japanese convergence thus: “We are trying to align each other’s approach towards the world in our case and towards the region. In Japan’s case i.e. the free and open Indo-Pacific Strategy, in our case it is the Act East Policy (read Indian northeast).”

No wonder then that China is rattled. Of all the joint moves of India and Japan, the only point Beijing picked on was New Delhi's decision to involve Japan in infrastructure projects in the northeast. Consider the following statement from China's foreign office spokesperson Hua Chunying: “China and India are working on seeking a fair and reasonable settlement which can be accepted by both sides through negotiations. Under such circumstances, we believe that any third party should respect the efforts made by China and India to settle the disputes through negotiations and any third party should not meddle in the disputes between China and India over territorial sovereignty in any form.”

:india:Clearly, the Chinese find themselves in a soup as they don’t know how to deal with Japan's increasing influence in India — which is now set to spread to the northeast. Needless to say, Beijing is getting a taste of its own medicine. This is precisely what India has been telling China for years, highlighting its reservations about Chinese troops' presence in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) in the guise of construction workers and more recently of the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) that passes through PoK.:india:

China has never listened to India on either concern. And there is no reason why India should heed to China's concerns of a “third party meddling” in the northeast.

India should tell the Chinese bluntly whenever Beijing raises the issue diplomatically, which it surely would, that New Delhi won’t involve the Japanese in its northeastern region if and only if Beijing itself withdraws its “construction workers” from PoK and scraps the CPEC.

http://www.dailyo.in/politics/india-japan-modi-abe-northeast-china-bullet-train/story/1/19560.html
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top