India-China Relations

[Rowdy]

BEIJING: Bhagavad Gita, a sacred ancient Indian scripture, has made its debut in China after its Chinese version was released during an international Yoga conference being held in the Communist nation. Translated by Prof Wang Zhu Cheng and Ling Hai of Zhejiang University in Shanghai and published by Sichuan People's Publications, the book was launched at a function attended by eminent Yoga teachers from India who had converged at Dujiangyan in southwestern Sichuan province to attend Yoga Festival. The book was released by Indian Ambassador to China Ashok K Kantha yesterday. The foreword for the book was written by K Nagaraj Naidu who was till recently the Consul General at the Indian Consulate in Guangzhou. Ancient Buddhist scriptures are well known in China as they made their way from the times of Huen Tsang journey to India in the 7th century. This is perhaps the first time a well known Hindu ancient religious text has been published in China. Last year, scholars from India and China published an Encyclopaedia on the age-old cultural contacts between the two countries, tracing back their history to over 2000 years. About 21 eminent yoga teachers are providing training to about 700 yoga enthusiasts from all over China under the first India- China (Chengdu) International Yoga Festival. The five-day Yoga festival will end on June 21, the first UN Yoga Day during which a number events are planned all over China and Hong Kong. Bhagavad Gita Makes Debut in Communist China

Communal chinese ......
30 fracking characters

 

[I_PLAY_BAD]

I respect Chinese for their hard work and economic growth. They have earned it. But if they try to hurt us using that economic might then we should also do the same and when China extends a friendly hand to us we must extend our both. That is how we should be. And China's support to Pakistan is highly unwelcome in India. That has only created more hatred towards china among the Indians. Don't understand what significance can a RANDI (Research and Development International) like Pakistan be of use to China

 

[Indx TechStyle]

China Calls for Talks Among NSG Members to Admit India, Others

BEIJING: China on Monday called for discussions on whether "India and other
countries" who have not signed the Non-
Proliferation Treaty (NPT) can join the Nuclear
Suppliers Group (NSG), amid new diplomatic
push by influential members of the 48-member
grouping to admit India.
Replying to a question about a media report in
Pakistan stating that China has assured that it
will push for Islamabad's membership into the
group if India is admitted, Foreign Ministry
spokesperson Hua Chunying said that whether
or not Non-NPT countries be admitted should be
subjected to "through discussion" among the
NSG members.
"We quite understand the aspiration of the
Indian side of taking part in the NSG," she said.
"China's principle is that the NSG is an
important part of the non-proliferation regime.
This regime is built upon the NPT" following a
long time consensus by the international
community, she said. China is part of 48-
member NSG group.
NSG chairman Rafael Grossi had visited India
this month and held talks with top leaders there
about India's admission as part of efforts to
build consensus to admit New Delhi. India's
case is being pressed by the US and other
influential countries based on its record in non-
proliferation and the India-US civil nuclear
accord.
China's call for talks among NSG members
about "India and other Non-NPT" members
indicate that Beijing may push for the case of
Pakistan, which in the past has been accused of
passing of nuclear technology to Iran and other
countries.
China has been carrying on with its own civil
nuclear technology collaboration with Pakistan,
building many nuclear plants including a new
1100 mw plant with USD 6.5 billion assistance in
Karachi which drew criticism from NSG
members. It earlier assisted Pakistan building 4
nuclear power plants, two with 300 mw capacity
and two other with 320 mw capacity.
Besides seeking US and others countries'
support, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has
urged China to back India's case for admission
in the NSG during his visit here in May.
Justifying China's stand, Hua said, "the NPT
review conference this year reaffirmed this
consensus" about its importance to global non-
proliferation of nuclear technology.
"That is the reason why whether a country is a
state party to the NPT is prerequisite of joining
the NSG."
"We have noted that apart from India, there
(are) other countries (who have) expressed the
willingness to join the NSG," Hua said, without
directly mentioning Pakistan.
"It has raised the question to the international
community whether or not the non-NPT country
can join the NSG. We have also noted efforts by
India and other non-NPT parties in the process
of international non-proliferation.
"But the issue concerning whether the non-NPT
countries can join the NSG should be subjected
to thorough discussion by NSG members in
accordance with the relevant rules so as to
make a decision on based on consensus through
consultation," Hua said.
"I need to stress that China's position is not
targeted against specific country. It applies to
all the non-NPT countries," she said.
Pressed further whether an assurance has been
given to Pakistan in this regard, the spokesperson said, "I would like (to) stress that
India and other non-NPT countries expressed their aspiration of joining the NSG."

 

[Indx TechStyle]

@Superdefender @garg_bharat @sorcerer
A positive response which and I did not expected.
US intervention resisted by Indian Culture

Illustration: Liu Rui/GT



The US was "disappointed" over India's decision not to issue visas to members of a US commission that reviews violations of religious freedom around the world, US State Department spokesperson John Kirby said last week. As the White House is attaching more importance to its ties with New Delhi in recent years, how the visa refusal will affect the US-India relationship is worth exploring.

This is not the first time the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) has been refused visas. The panel was denied access to India in 2009.

As a major power, New Delhi rarely plays up to other nations. This has been one of India's most significant features since it gained independence in 1947. National interest is always prioritized in New Delhi's foreign policies.

Given the independent and self-reliant stance of the Indian government, there is little likelihood for other powers to draw New Delhi over to their camps. Refusing visas to the US delegation is consistent to India's traditional way of handling its foreign relations.

The US, on the other hand, has long been attempting to use its soft power, especially its system of values, to influence the internal affairs of other nations. Since US President Barack Obama came into office, the White House has attached great significance to manipulating US smart power, a combination of hard power and soft power strategies, to influence others. As a core principle of Obama's foreign policy strategy, smart power was popularized by Hillary Clinton when she served as secretary of state.

However, to Washington's disappointment, New Delhi has the capability and determination to resist US-led Western cultural infiltration. While almost all the other civilized nations have been Westernized in many aspects of life, India has shown high confidence in its traditional culture.

Compared with other nations, Western culture has exerted little influence on New Delhi.

Cultural confidence is a key driving factor for India to stick to its own religions, ideologies and customs.

Judging from the current situation, the White House is attaching increasing importance to its relationship with India.

Following the rise of East Asia and South Asia, the whole of Asia is carrying more weight in the international system. As a major state that can reshape Asia's power pattern, India is becoming increasingly vital to the White House.

While Washington needs to draw New Delhi to its side to counter Beijing, the Indian government, which eyes the maximization of its interests, will not back off in the interactions with the US. This is why India has flatly refused to grant visas to the US religious panel this time.

The visa refusal may be a retaliatory measure to an unpleasant incident that happened in 2010 as well.

Then Indian ambassador to the US Meera Shankar was singled out and frisked by a security agent at US airport, allegedly because she was wearing a sari. This was unacceptable to India, which later strongly protested to the US.

The principle of reciprocity is honored in Indian diplomatic activities. It is unsurprising for India to retaliate over this unpleasant incident six years later.

Cultural collision between the US and India will see an intensifying trend in the future. Although in the US, where religion is separated from politics, the USCIRF may not represent the governmental stance, it is part of the White House strategy to use its soft power, including religion, to influence and even subvert other regimes. The US will continue to infiltrate its system of values into India by all possible means, to which New Delhi will still firmly reject.

The ruling BJP is a Hindu nationalist party. Denying visa to religious panels reflects the determination of the administration of Narendra Modi to protect local cultures and religions. Tougher US intervention will see firmer resistance from India.






Nice Article,
Yet I hate that cartoon. Elephant isn't our representator.

 

[Superdefender]

@Indx TechStyle, thanks for the article. Pleased to read it. Days are not far away when US will have to behave and oblidge according to what India will say. Perhaps I will be a middle aged old man at that time. Just want to be alive till that day.

 

[Superdefender]

@Indx TechStyle, thanks for the article. Pleased to read it. Days are not far away when US will have to behave and oblidge according to what India will say. Perhaps I will be a middle aged old man at that time. Just want to be alive till that day.

 

[sorcerer]

@Superdefender @garg_bharat @sorcerer
A positive response which and I did not expected.

The Chinese game of appreciating any moves by any nation that resists US.No big deal..
Its how Chinese sells their "peaceful invasion"

 

[SANITY]

China Claims 'Large Differences' Over India's Inclusion in Nuke Club NSG

File photo of PM Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping. China is seen as leading opposition to the US move to include India in the 48-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group. (Reuters)

BEIJING: China said on Sunday that more talks were needed to build a consensus on which countries can join the main group controlling access to sensitive nuclear technology, after a push by the United States to include India.

China is seen as leading opposition to the US move to include India in the 48-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group(NSG), but other countries, including New Zealand, Turkey, South Africa and Austria also oppose Indian membership, according to diplomats.


The NSG aims to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons by restricting the sale of items that can be used to make those arms.

New Delhi already enjoys most of the benefits of membership under a 2008 exemption to NSG rules granted to support its nuclear cooperation deal with Washington, even though India has developed atomic weapons and never signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the main global arms control pact.

"Large differences" remain over the issue of non-NPT countries joining the NSG, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said in an online statement.

"With regard to what to do on the issue of non-NPT signatories joining (the NSG), China consistently supports having ample discussion on this to seek consensus and agreement and come to a unanimous decision," Hong said.

"The NPT is the political and legal basis for the entire international non-proliferation system," Hong said, adding that China would support the group in further talks to come to a consensus at an early date.

However, reports from earlier this week had said that the US-led push for India to join the elite club made some headway as several opponents appeared more willing to work towards a compromise. China however remained defiant.

It was reported that nations resisting India's admission to the group, including South Africa, New Zealand and Turkey, somewhat softened their stance, opening the door to a process under which non-NPT states such as India might join.

Opponents argue that granting India membership would further undermine efforts to prevent proliferation. It would also infuriate Pakistan, which responded to India's membership bid with one of its own and has the backing of its close ally China.

Pakistan joining would be unacceptable to many, given its track record. The scientist that headed its nuclear weapons programme ran an illicit network for years that sold nuclear secrets to countries including North Korea and Iran.

A decision on Indian membership is not expected before an NSG plenary meeting in Seoul on June 20, but diplomats have said Washington has been pressuring hold-outs.

Most of the hold-outs oppose the idea of admitting a non-NPT state such as India and argue that if it is to be admitted, it should be under criteria that apply equally to all states rather than under a "tailor-made" solution for a US ally.

© Thomson Reuters 2016
http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/as-u...talks-needed-1418122?pfrom=home-lateststories

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi (L) and Chinese President Xi Jinping shake hands before a meeting in Xian, Shaanxi province, China (May 14, 2015).
Image Credit: REUTERS/Kim Kyung-Hoon
China-India Relations After the NSG Plenary
Make no mistake: India’s failure to win membership in the NSG will shape Sino-Indian relations.

Few analysts following developments at the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) plenary in South Korea expected India’s membership bid to sail through. As the dust settles, what is clear is that Xi Jinping’s China differs considerably from Hu Jintao’s China. The latter did not want to stand alone; the former is on the path to establishing China as the challenger in the global order – and understands that such a project is necessarily a lonely pursuit.

Beyond the arguments of whether or not joining the NSG accords India additional advantages, what stood out over the past month is the Modi government’s impressive ability to set a concrete objective, and pursue it with great coordination. While Foreign Secretary S Jaishankar was leading India’s charge in Seoul, the prime minister himself brought up the issue with Xi in Tashkent. This ability to strategize and cogently act is a key takeaway and must be utilized moving forward.

For India, what transpired in Seoul is much more than just a reflection of China’s attitude towards India’s aspirations – it is about how India is seen as a power by others around the globe. While China raised the bogey of “due procedure,” some others reportedly saw logic. Some among them, like Switzerland had promised support to India as recently as a few weeks ago; others included Brazil, India’s partner in BRICS.

While this is not the first time that China has taken a stand inimical to Indian interests, this time is markedly different. It is now unequivocally clear that China objects to Indian aspirations of being a bigger player in the global order. There are indications that it is concerned about how India will react – the Chinese Foreign Ministry has unilaterally claimed that developments in the NSG meeting won’t affect the relationship. In the NSG meeting though, it expended little political capital blocking India.

The challenge ahead for India then, is two-fold: First, manage the relationship with China, which is likely to begin immediately. For example, in multilateral forums where the two work together, such as BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, climate talks, or the World Trade Organization, India will be especially cognizant that China will pursue a strategy to primarily benefit itself. It is likely that Indian representatives will be extra vigilant against making concessions, and pursue their own negotiations, possibly independent of China’s initiatives.

This brings us to the second challenge: The need to project the image of a confident India by removing ambivalence about how it sees its place in the world. Going by reports from Seoul, there is work to be done on this front. India has no time to be coy and equivocal anymore; to be granted exceptions, it will have to demand them as a principal rising power in the 21st century. India may be less powerful than China economically and militarily but it will continue to be a substantial power throughout the coming years. Additionally, its enduring appeal will continue to be in its democratic policy, and the fact that it allows a multiplicity of views and opposing political opinions. If Modi indeed believes all that he about India’s stature in the world, it needs to reflect not only in his speeches, but also in his foreign policy.

For India to accomplish this, two prior conditions need to be fulfilled. First, the economy must be allowed to grow at the current pace without systemic shocks. Second, as anyone with the slightest exposure to Indian foreign policymaking knows, the country has been its own greatest enemy by being hesitant and postponing taking hard decisions. While changing this overnight is difficult, the foreign policy elite will now act decisively, and cease fence-sitting. Only by presenting itself as a smart and confident power in the its neighborhood will India be able to come across as a sure-footed global player.

The Way Forward

To begin with, India will have to understand that China’s approach to foreign policy based on the concept of leverage. During Rajiv Gandhi’s seminal 1988 visit, China signaled that it was keen on developing the relationship without working to resolve the border issue immediately. China believed that India was keen to resolve the matter, which it gave it leverage. It is now incumbent on India to do the same by inserting itself in situations where China has high stakes – situations that challenge its aspirational move toward the top of the global order. India must do this with finesse, ensuring it does not spite China directly. For one, rebuilding the relationship since the 1980s has been useful in many aspects (like managing the border question) – letting all that slip is unwarranted. Second, unlike other powers, most notably the United States, India occupies the landmass contiguous to China, which comes with an additional motivation to calibrate its actions. With these caveats in place, India should approach its China policy with eye on three timeframes: immediate, mid-term, and long-term.

The Short Term

In the immediate term India must not lose any opportunity to integrate itself with China’s neighborhood in Asia. An opportunity is going to present itself in early July when the verdict for the Philippines’ arbitration case on the South China Sea comes out. India must utilize the opportunity to integrate itself with Southeast Asian nations and squarely back the rule of law and international norms. India must emphasize that the question of “due procedure,” used with great dexterity by China in Seoul, cannot be applied selectively.

It must also once and for all abandon the question of maintaining equal distance from the United States and China. As is evident, as a big, rising economy, India is unlikely to get concessions that China benevolently doles out to smaller players in the region. Under these circumstances, India must step up its cooperation with the United States. This does not necessarily mean losing its ability to make independent in policy decisions – as the last decade and a half has demonstrated, the Indian establishment is capable of maintaining strategic autonomy in policymaking while stepping up engagement with the United States.

While the NSG plenary meeting was underway, the Indian foreign minister was in Beijing seeking Chinese investment. Established processes like this, including the functioning of frameworks set in place for issues like trade or border management, must continue seamlessly. Simultaneously though, India can start remedying its vast trade deficit by introducing non-tariff barriers against unimportant items, and gradually expanding the list. It can instead ramp up Chinese investment in the country in big projects, such as in the infrastructure sector, developing leverage in the process by tying them to Chinese support for India on important international issues.

The Medium Term

In the medium term, India needs to understand that while its non-ascension to the NSG fits Pakistan’s agenda, China’s actions are primarily to maintain and advance its own superiority. With this is context, India must vigorously de-hyphenate itself from Pakistan while elaborating on its place in the global order to other countries. This would mean desisting from mentioning Pakistan as a comparative example at all times. The threat from terrorism emanating out of the country into the region notwithstanding, few aspects of India’s rise have to do with Pakistan anymore. If India’s policymakers need to bring up a neighbor while discussing regional ambitions, it must be China. This will serve two purposes: One, it will further integrate India with the larger concerns in the Asia-Pacific. More importantly, followed rigorously, this will amply elucidate to other countries where India’s priorities lie – in being a rising power in the region where the other competitor is China. For this to be achieved, India will need to coordinate its signaling carefully – in private as well as in public.

The coming months are likely to see increases Indian activities in the Indo-Pacific. The navy has been directed to conduct more joint exercises with navies in Southeast Asia as part of its Act East policy. This comes right after the annual U.S.-India Exercise Malabar that now permanently includes Japan. It has recently established a two-plus-two dialogue mechanism with Japan, and this would be an appropriate opportunity to set up similar mechanisms with other countries. The Indian navy has recently stated its objective of shaping “a favorable and positive maritime environment, for enhancing net security in India’s areas of maritime interest.”

An inexpensive way of accomplishing this is by expanding military and political ties with players in the region. India already maintains and repairs Vietnamese defense platforms, and has been training its pilots. With the latest developments, indications are that New Delhi might finally move forward on selling supersonic Brahmos cruise missiles to the country. Additional security arrangements are underway – theThai prime minister’s visit earlier in June was marked by agreements to cooperate in defense and maritime areas. The Singaporean prime minister and Indonesian president are also scheduled to visit in the next few months with similar agendas.

The Long Term

The longer term measures are obviously ones that will require the most effort as well as administrative and political capital. The primary strategy in this lies in exploiting China’s discomfort over the Tibet question. India must quietly integrate Tibetan leaders into its national narrative, as it did by inviting the prime minister of the Tibetan Government in Exile to Narendra Modi’s inauguration, or the way ministers shared the stagewith the Dalai Lama for his 80th birthday. In the longer run this will allow it to have a greater say during the likely turmoil in the post-Dalai Lama scenario.

India must work to socially, politically, and economically integrate Arunachal Pradesh and other parts of northeast India with the rest of the country. This will mean developing infrastructure in the border with China along with sustained efforts to improve education and employment opportunities in the region as a whole. Considering the extent to which former Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to the state displeased China, the process can begin with continuing visits by Modi. Nothing will peeve China more than seeing a content and prosperous “South Tibet” as part of India. At the same time, it will send out a positive message about Indian state capacity.

 

[SANITY]

Maybe we can also give voice to Tibetans.

 

[SANITY]

India Hardly Trades With China - And Why That's Not Changing
In Himalayas, there is a way but not a will for China-India trade
Efforts to boost commerce stumble on bad infrastructure on Indian side and lack of overall trust between the two

BLOOMBERG

A tourist (right) hands over Indian rupee banknotes to a vendor standing next to a cow at Tsongmo Lake near the Nathula Pass. Photo: Bloomberg

Deep in the Himalayas some three miles above sea level, Indian security forces and Chinese soldiers gaze at each other through a barbed-wire fence while trucks carrying goods from both sides pass through a large iron gate that marks the border.

The Nathula Pass, once part of the ancient Silk Road and later sealed after a 1962 war, was reopened in 2006 as a symbol of improved relations between Asian neighbours that account for more than a third of the world’s population. A decade later, however, it perhaps better reflects a trust deficit: the pass does not account for 1 per cent of bilateral commerce.

Business is very slow here. I’m just managing to survive
RIKU DOMA, A SHOPKEEPER
“Business is very slow here,” said Riku Doma, 42, a shopkeeper at a market close to Nathula who sells jackets, blankets and shoes in India. “I’m just managing to survive.“

Large sections of the road linking India’s state of Sikkim with Tibet are narrow and littered with potholes. The area has no warehouses to store goods nor any hotels. Only 56 low-end items can be traded, like tea, bicycles and canned food. And for about half the year, heavy snowfall forces authorities to close the border altogether.

The connectivity problems in the Himalayas, long a natural land barrier between India and China, extend to sea routes that account for the bulk of trade between the nations. A lack of quality roads around ports, insufficient warehouses, high tariffs and visa restrictions have contributed to a lopsided and lacklustre trade relationship. To help ease trade barriers, negotiators are meeting this week.

Shoppers walk past stalls selling mostly Chinese goods at Tsongmo Lake near the Nathula Pass. Photo: Bloomberg

In the last four years, commerce between the nations has failed to match its peak of US$79 billion in 2011, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. China’s trade with the US has grown 21 per cent in that time to US$627 billion. Moreover, India has a trade deficit with China of nearly US$50 billion, its largest with any country.

“Both sides are yet to tap their trade potential,” said Ravi Shekhar Vishal, an assistant professor at Sikkim University who co-authored a research paper on Nathula trade. “That’s primarily because the trust between them is fragile and superficial.”

The large trade deficit makes any future opening politically difficult for Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Lawmakers keep urging him to take protectionist measures against China, and the gap routinely comes up in Modi’s meetings with President Xi Jinping. Even so, Indian policy makers realise that little can be done in the short term.

Vehicles travel along a mountain road near the Nathula Pass. Photo: Bloomberg

For one, both nations are members of the World Trade Organisation, which does not allow governments to discriminate against specific countries in setting trade policy. A bigger problem, however, is India’s own infrastructure – its roads, ports and railways. In 2014 it cost US$1,332 on average to export a container from India, compared with US$823 to ship from China.

It’s just not convenient to do business between the two nations. There’s a lack of trust between the two peoples
HUO JIANGUO, SENIOR RESEARCHER
Even the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), a 16-country trade deal that aims to unify a market of more than three billion people, has problems. India wants moderate import tariffs on goods rather than complete elimination of duties, while China is pushing to increase the number of products that will attract zero duty.

Due to an impression that India is creating obstacles, the chance of a breakthrough at the talks isn’t very high, said Amitendu Palit, a senior research fellow at the Institute of South Asian Studies at the National University of Singapore. RCEP members will start a two-day meeting in Jakarta on Monday.

“It’s just not convenient to do business between the two nations,” said Huo Jianguo, senior researcher at the Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation. “There’s a lack of trust between the two peoples.”

 

[adrenalin]

Maybe we can also give voice to Tibetans.

we should also give back Tibet to tibetans.

 

[Scarlett Lopez]

No country can put itself opposite NPT: China

​

Amid India's assertion that it will not sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to gain entry into NSG, an adamant China on Thursday said "no country should or can put itself opposite the NPT".

"We have repeatedly stated our position on the accession of non-NPT countries into the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG)," Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesman Lu Kang said here, reacting to External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj's statement in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday that India will not sign the NPT.

"It is worth mentioning that China does not make the rules for how to become new members of the group. The international community has forged a consensus long ago that the NPT is the cornerstone of the international non-proliferation regime. No country should or can put itself opposite to the NPT," Lu said.

Swaraj had said India is engaging with China to iron out differences after Beijing created "procedural hurdles" for its entry into the 48-member NSG but made it clear that government will never ink NPT, which only recognises five countries — the US, Russia, the UK, France and China UK, — as nuclear weapon states.

Read More | Business Standard

 

[Indx TechStyle]

No country can put itself opposite NPT: China

​

Amid India's assertion that it will not sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to gain entry into NSG, an adamant China on Thursday said "no country should or can put itself opposite the NPT".

"We have repeatedly stated our position on the accession of non-NPT countries into the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG)," Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesman Lu Kang said here, reacting to External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj's statement in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday that India will not sign the NPT.

"It is worth mentioning that China does not make the rules for how to become new members of the group. The international community has forged a consensus long ago that the NPT is the cornerstone of the international non-proliferation regime. No country should or can put itself opposite to the NPT," Lu said.

Swaraj had said India is engaging with China to iron out differences after Beijing created "procedural hurdles" for its entry into the 48-member NSG but made it clear that government will never ink NPT, which only recognises five countries — the US, Russia, the UK, France and China UK, — as nuclear weapon states.

Read More | Business Standard

LOL, just asking in Chinese style.
Why are you so afraid of Peaceful Rise of India?:bounce:

 

[SANITY]

Is it possible for India to sign NPT and also be recognised as a nuclear weapon state?

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Is it possible for India to sign NPT and also be recognised as a nuclear weapon state?

Not now. P5 have monopoly.
We will make it possible and our enemies gonna be pissed off.

 

[adrenalin]

Is it possible for India to sign NPT and also be recognised as a nuclear weapon state?

no, rules forbid. but NSg membership means defacto nuke power. P4 already support us, only 1 thief Chini do not.

 

[SANITY]

Not now. P5 have monopoly.
We will make it possible and our enemies gonna be pissed off.

Who among P5 will oppose us apart from China? China contends that NPT is a must to get NSG membership. If we get in NPT as a recognised nuclear power, they will have no legal or moral ground to prevent India from getting in NSG.

 

[sukhish]

its a delaying tactic by china, changing NPT rules will take another 10 years.

 

[SANITY]

its a delaying tactic by china, changing NPT rules will take another 10 years.

Why would it take 10 years? Does some rule prevents it from changing? Even if it does, we should still continue to press for NPT, NSG, UNSC at the same time.