India China LAC & International Border Discussions

Status
Not open for further replies.

Neil

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2010
Messages
2,818
Likes
3,546
Country flag

Its really surprising that RSS/BJP doesn't have an equivalent party/ideological counterpart in Nepal. Congress, Communist all have supported their ideological counterparts in Nepal while BJP even while in power in India and with all powerful visionary leadership is unable built something similar. Very myopic considering its the only other Hindu majority state in the world.
 

Belagutti

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2020
Messages
127
Likes
128
Country flag
Its really surprising that RSS/BJP doesn't have an equivalent party/ideological counterpart in Nepal. Congress, Communist all have supported their ideological counterparts in Nepal while BJP even while in power in India and with all powerful visionary leadership is unable built something similar. Very myopic considering its the only other Hindu majority state in the world.
Rashtriyata prajatantra Party
 

Prakshepak

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2014
Messages
114
Likes
540
Country flag
More like a exchange but if it was china they could have. But in the case of them would they ?
What happened to the guy we supposedly got kidnapped from Nepal? I think they just said f*#k him. Best indication of something might have happened on this front was when their NSA few years back had indicated that may be Kulbhushan was mistaken identity or something and our media like Arnab went ape shit on them with "We told you so..." leaving no wiggle room for working anything out..
 

Anandhu Krishna

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2017
Messages
1,086
Likes
4,060
India Did Its Best To Reply To China's "Aggressive Actions'': Mike Pompeo

Washington:

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Wednesday that Indians have done their best to respond to China's "incredibly aggressive actions", asserting that Beijing has a pattern of "instigating" territorial disputes and the world shouldn't allow this bullying to take place.

"I've spoken with Foreign (External Affairs) Minister (S) Jaishankar a number of times about this (Chinese aggressive actions). The Chinese took incredibly aggressive actions. The Indians have done their best to respond to that," Mr Pompeo told reporters at a news conference here.

read more

"Done their best"
 

Concard

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
1,132
Likes
8,720
Country flag
Did a Chinese Hack Kill Canada’s Greatest Tech Company?

View attachment 52434
This is an open secret. Huawei was built on stolen technology from Nortel and Cisco. I don't think there is any debate on how Huawei miraculously became major telecom equipment manufacturer doing original research. Chinese want to become number 1 by hook or crook. And they are willing to go any length to achieve that. China doesn't have R&D centers, what they have is R&D&T i.e., Research and development and Theft. R & D & T was coined by an American University if I am right.
 

rock127

Maulana Rockullah
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Messages
10,569
Likes
25,230
Country flag
Enjoy till Chini lizard is back with something new. :playball:

btw here is Dhalism Vs Chun Lee ... I once played using Dhalism and won all the matches without a single defeat and guess what beat up Mr Bison full 100% power in 2 straight rounds.... coincidence? :eek1: :eek1: :eek1:

I will meditate and destroy you! :shoot:

Dhalism Vs Chun Lee.jpg


 

Assassin 2.0

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2019
Messages
6,087
Likes
30,705
Country flag
Beijing likes to talk about “community of shared future of mankind”. What exactly does it mean?
July 9, 2020, 7:35 AM IST Syed Akbaruddin in TOI Edit Page | Edit Page, India, World | TOI

Discerning UN speak is an art form. When Chinese President Xi Jinping first articulated the notion of the “community of shared future of mankind”, also translated as “community of common destiny”, at the UN in 2015, it appeared vague. Not many paid attention.

Things have changed since. At the 19th CPC National Congress in 2017, “building a community with a shared future for mankind” was enshrined as a core concept and basic policy guiding Chinese diplomacy. The goal of China’s flagship Belt and Road Initiative is described as moving closer towards a “community of shared future for mankind”. Xi’s foreign policy speech compilation is titled ‘On building a community of shared future for mankind’.

It’s not only Chinese spokespersons who articulate it. UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres made a glowing reference that called for development cooperation to contribute to “building a community of shared future for mankind”. Taking the cue, UN agencies sprinkle it in their documentation.

Chinese sponsored UN General Assembly resolutions inevitably carry references. One in the 73rd session in 2018 even called for a “community of shared future for humankind in cyberspace”. Individual countries, at times, oppose such efforts. Recent reports mention objections to a ‘Chinese phrase’ delaying the UN’s 75th anniversary declaration.

Chinese scholars trace the term’s lineage to the tianxia (all under heaven) system. It’s said to build on Deng Xiaoping’s “peace and development” thesis, Jiang Zemin’s “new security concept” and Hu Jintao’s call for a “harmonious world”. According to Liu Ming, a Chinese scholar, building a “community with a shared future for humankind” will bring five changes to international relations: developing a new model for major power competition, shifting security concerns to non-traditional threats, promoting win-win economic cooperation instead of trade and technological competition, integrating non-Western practices and governance with the Western system of universal values, and managing economic development in a way that ensures ecological balance.

Couched in lofty principles of sovereign equality and mutual respect – first elucidated in the India-China ‘Panchsheel’ Agreement of 1954 – it stresses complementarity with “win-win” outcomes rather than competition and promotes tolerance for political and cultural differences.

The emphasis is on continuity of existing international institutions rather than demand for redistribution of power. Need for changes to the structural arrangement inherited from the World War II era is downplayed. The focus is on issues with broad appeal – sustainable development, countering non-traditional security threats, epidemics and pandemics, drug trafficking, money laundering, human trafficking and collaboration in frontier domains like high seas, polar regions, outer space and cyberspace.

Beyond generalities, it reflects the belief that China’s capacities and desire to play a global role have grown and need to be accommodated in global governance. But, it’s tempered with the realisation that China cannot recast the current order. Hence, the effort is to foster China’s integration in the existing order as a great power with leadership status. The subtext beneath the benign sounding concept is, at a minimum, sidestepping the universal values and core principles that hold up the existing world order and may stall China’s rise.

As Joseph Nye explained, soft power is dependent on an attractive vision of the future. China’s concept aims to be alluring. Some find it appealing. Yet, China’s assertiveness has aroused global concerns. China’s strained, even confrontational, relations because of historical, security, territorial and maritime issues dim the attractiveness of the precept. Unsettled sovereignty issues have a disconcerting way of undermining other aspirations. This is happening with China too.

Beyond a blueprint, replacing a withering order requires a game plan for change. China has not yet unveiled any game plan for implementing reform. Maybe, deliberately so. In the long game, even as China enhances its status, it feels others may be worn down or distracted from exercising leadership or at a minimum adjust to non-confrontational ways of competition. Biding time – in plain sight and without hiding – may well be the game plan.

On our part, we need to deploy those with expertise in deciphering China’s intent and those with strategic insights to assess this offering. We need to determine whether China’s “community of shared future” is the global future that India wants – in full, part or not at all. We need the guardrails of grand strategy to guide our specific choices of cooperation, competition and confrontation
 

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
6,174
Likes
25,845
Country flag

Sanglamorre

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2019
Messages
5,644
Likes
25,987
Country flag
Such vengeance... Much territory retaking...
Spin Hoga ab. I won't be surprised if a certain someone claims this as absolute victory and reversing '62 and hence they don't need to do anything more.
 

garg_bharat

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
5,078
Likes
10,139
Country flag
Beijing likes to talk about “community of shared future of mankind”. What exactly does it mean?
July 9, 2020, 7:35 AM IST Syed Akbaruddin in TOI Edit Page | Edit Page, India, World | TOI

Discerning UN speak is an art form. When Chinese President Xi Jinping first articulated the notion of the “community of shared future of mankind”, also translated as “community of common destiny”, at the UN in 2015, it appeared vague. Not many paid attention.

Things have changed since. At the 19th CPC National Congress in 2017, “building a community with a shared future for mankind” was enshrined as a core concept and basic policy guiding Chinese diplomacy. The goal of China’s flagship Belt and Road Initiative is described as moving closer towards a “community of shared future for mankind”. Xi’s foreign policy speech compilation is titled ‘On building a community of shared future for mankind’.

It’s not only Chinese spokespersons who articulate it. UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres made a glowing reference that called for development cooperation to contribute to “building a community of shared future for mankind”. Taking the cue, UN agencies sprinkle it in their documentation.

Chinese sponsored UN General Assembly resolutions inevitably carry references. One in the 73rd session in 2018 even called for a “community of shared future for humankind in cyberspace”. Individual countries, at times, oppose such efforts. Recent reports mention objections to a ‘Chinese phrase’ delaying the UN’s 75th anniversary declaration.

Chinese scholars trace the term’s lineage to the tianxia (all under heaven) system. It’s said to build on Deng Xiaoping’s “peace and development” thesis, Jiang Zemin’s “new security concept” and Hu Jintao’s call for a “harmonious world”. According to Liu Ming, a Chinese scholar, building a “community with a shared future for humankind” will bring five changes to international relations: developing a new model for major power competition, shifting security concerns to non-traditional threats, promoting win-win economic cooperation instead of trade and technological competition, integrating non-Western practices and governance with the Western system of universal values, and managing economic development in a way that ensures ecological balance.

Couched in lofty principles of sovereign equality and mutual respect – first elucidated in the India-China ‘Panchsheel’ Agreement of 1954 – it stresses complementarity with “win-win” outcomes rather than competition and promotes tolerance for political and cultural differences.

The emphasis is on continuity of existing international institutions rather than demand for redistribution of power. Need for changes to the structural arrangement inherited from the World War II era is downplayed. The focus is on issues with broad appeal – sustainable development, countering non-traditional security threats, epidemics and pandemics, drug trafficking, money laundering, human trafficking and collaboration in frontier domains like high seas, polar regions, outer space and cyberspace.

Beyond generalities, it reflects the belief that China’s capacities and desire to play a global role have grown and need to be accommodated in global governance. But, it’s tempered with the realisation that China cannot recast the current order. Hence, the effort is to foster China’s integration in the existing order as a great power with leadership status. The subtext beneath the benign sounding concept is, at a minimum, sidestepping the universal values and core principles that hold up the existing world order and may stall China’s rise.

As Joseph Nye explained, soft power is dependent on an attractive vision of the future. China’s concept aims to be alluring. Some find it appealing. Yet, China’s assertiveness has aroused global concerns. China’s strained, even confrontational, relations because of historical, security, territorial and maritime issues dim the attractiveness of the precept. Unsettled sovereignty issues have a disconcerting way of undermining other aspirations. This is happening with China too.

Beyond a blueprint, replacing a withering order requires a game plan for change. China has not yet unveiled any game plan for implementing reform. Maybe, deliberately so. In the long game, even as China enhances its status, it feels others may be worn down or distracted from exercising leadership or at a minimum adjust to non-confrontational ways of competition. Biding time – in plain sight and without hiding – may well be the game plan.

On our part, we need to deploy those with expertise in deciphering China’s intent and those with strategic insights to assess this offering. We need to determine whether China’s “community of shared future” is the global future that India wants – in full, part or not at all. We need the guardrails of grand strategy to guide our specific choices of cooperation, competition and confrontation
All communists are confused.

This is a convoluted manifesto for some bright future for China and misery for others.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top