Bay of Bengal war games not aimed at China: U.S.

[Sinosphere]

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - The United States said on Thursday that next month's joint naval exercises with several Asian nations, but not China, were not aimed at isolating Beijing.

The navies of India, Japan, Singapore, Australia and the United States will hold the war games in the Bay of Bengal, the first such joint exercises by the five nations.

Admiral Timothy J. Keating, the commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, told reporters in New Delhi the exercises were not an attempt to corner China. "There is no, let me emphasize, no effort on our part or any of those (participating) countries' part, I am sure, to isolate China, to put China in a closet," Keating said.

"Rather than give the perception that we are looking to isolate China, quite the contrary, we are looking to embrace them to the extent that we should and can and want to, and the extent that they want," he added.

About two dozen ships, along with submarines, are expected to participate.

Keating refused to comment if any of the U.S. ships involved in the exercises would be nuclear-armed.

India's powerful communists, who are protesting over a civil nuclear deal between India and the United States, have said they would organize protests along the eastern coast against the naval exercises.

Last month, they protested a port call by USS Nimitz to southern India, saying it would compromise India's sovereignty.

Reuters.

[jawwal]

Of course they are directed at China, all sides are raising their military tactics, an early signs of a new cold war..

[Sinosphere]

Of course they are directed at China, all sides are raising their military tactics, an early signs of a new cold war..

I agree with you, this is very unfortunate for China.

[Kiaar]

I don't know why the US keeps doing that. We have very strong economic ties with China and I really can't believe these morons in charge of my country aren't trying to make good friends with the Chinese government.

The whole communism era is over and it's time to get over the political squabbles. It would benefit both China and the US greatly if they started working together and and at least tried to build some sort of friendship.

[Sinosphere]

I don't know why the US keeps doing that. We have very strong economic ties with China and I really can't believe these morons in charge of my country aren't trying to make good friends with the Chinese government.

The whole communism era is over and it's time to get over the political squabbles. It would benefit both China and the US greatly if they started working together and and at least tried to build some sort of friendship.

I agree with you, infact China wants very good relations with the US and don't want to see any conflict or affect the strong Sino-US relations.

China desires economic enhancement as well as general good bilateral relations with the US.

I can understand from the US point of view. China is indeed still a communist country, but I can tell you this only exist in name. Some people might debate about this point but that is understandable.

China is willing to work and cooperate with the US in virtually all affairs, but in politics, individual interests will have to come first as this is natural behaviour in world affairs. It is because of this Sino-US relations are sometimes in a turbulence situation.

I think the most important obstacle to enhance Sino-US ties is the Taiwan situation.

Hopefully, China and the US would come to an understanding together where they would cooperate together without any obstacles between them.

The US is an important country in the world and China recognises this. Therefore China hope Sino-US future relations would go to new heights. :)

[Kiaar]

I agree with you, infact China wants very good relations with the US and don't want to see any conflict or affect the strong Sino-US relations.

China desires economic enhancement as well as general good bilateral relations with the US.

I can understand from the US point of view. China is indeed still a communist country, but I can tell you this only exist in name. Some people might debate about this point but that is understandable.

China is willing to work and cooperate with the US in virtually all affairs, but in politics, individual interests will have to come first as this is natural behaviour in world affairs. It is because of this Sino-US relations are sometimes in a turbulence situation.

I think the most important obstacle to enhance Sino-US ties is the Taiwan situation.

Hopefully, China and the Us would come to an understanding together where they would cooperate together without any obstacles between them.

The US is an important country in the world and China recognises this. Therefore China hope Sino-US future relations will go to new heights. :)

Agreed as well. It does seem Taiwan is the only real issue between the two countries, though to be honest I don't know why the US is butting in, it's not really our business what happens there.

Though I do think it would be great for our countries to get a long better. As you said, China really is only communist in name only. The market is more capitalist than the American one is.

Well hopefully things work out.

[Sinosphere]

Agreed as well. It does seem Taiwan is the only real issue between the two countries, though to be honest I don't know why the US is butting in, it's not really our business what happens there.

Though I do think it would be great for our countries to get a long better. As you said, China really is only communist in name only. The market is more capitalist than the American one is.

Well hopefully things work out.

I am sure eventually in the end all would be worked out and the future Sino-US relations would be very bright.

Regarding the US involvement in Taiwan, from the Chinese point of view, this is how we see it.

The US sees China as the new rival in world affairs, both economically and militarily. Both the US and China recognises that China cannot become a true superpower without uniting with Taiwan.

Inorder not to let China increase more in power and territory, the US would stick to the so-called "status-quo". The strategy for the US is that it would not let China unite with Taiwan and at the same time not to let Taiwan declare independence inorder not to provoke China.

So this is a win-win situation for the US, the US would accomplish the fact that China would not grow stronger and pleasing China by not letting Taiwan independence. It is an ugly situation, but that is politics and the game to be played.

Taiwan has also been described by top US generals that it is an "Unsinkable Aircraft Carrier" for China, should China unite with Taiwan.

The US also recognise that if China take Taiwan, China would have an unsinkable aircraft carrier in the South China Sea and would dominate the sea lanes aswell as the waters around it.

I personally think this talk is a bit over extreme, but this is the case in the US strategical eyes.

China wishes peaceful unification with Taiwan inorder to realise the dream of a "Greater China". However, this is a difficult task as Taiwan would not unite with China at the moment and China really would not want to attack Taiwan because China see Taiwan compatriots as brothers.

This is an unfortunate situation for China, but hopefully, a peaceful solution would be realised in the future. :)

[Kiaar]

I am sure eventually in the end all would be worked out and the future Sino-US relations would be very bright.

Regarding the US involvement in Taiwan, from the Chinese point of view, this is how we see it.

The US sees China as the new rival in world affairs, both economically and militarily. Both the US and China recognises that China cannot become a true superpower without uniting with Taiwan.

Inorder not to let China increase more in power and territory, the US would stick to the so-called "status-quo". The strategy for the US is that it would not let China unite with Taiwan and at the same time not to let Taiwan declare independence inorder not to provoke China.

So this is a win-win situation for the US, the US would accomplish the fact that China would not grow stronger and pleasing China by not letting Taiwan independence. It is an ugly situation, but that is politics and the game to be played.

Taiwan has also been described by top US generals that it is an "Unsinkable Aircraft Carrier" for China, should China unite with Taiwan.

The US also recognise that if China take Taiwan, China would have an unsinkable aircraft carrier in the South China Sea and would dominate the sea lanes aswell as the waters around it.

I personally think this talk is a bit over extreme, but this is the case in the US strategical eyes.

China wishes peaceful unification with Taiwan inorder to realise the dream of a "Greater China". However, this is a difficult task as Taiwan would not unite with China at the moment and China really would not want to attack Taiwan because China see Taiwan compatriots as brothers.

This is an unfortunate situation for China, but hopefully, a peaceful solution would be realised in the future. :)

Thanks for the explanation. It's always interesting to see how other people from different point of views feel about it.

My guess is when China eventually becomes a more democratic nation or at least starts to learn that way, Taiwan will be more interested in unification. But it seems Taiwan likes the democracy and doesn't want to join with China again until they change their government form.

[Sinosphere]

Thanks for the explanation. It's always interesting to see how other people from different point of views feel about it.

My guess is when China eventually becomes a more democratic nation or at least starts to learn that way, Taiwan will be more interested in unification. But it seems Taiwan likes the democracy and doesn't want to join with China again until they change their government form.

I understand some people might not like the form of government in China or how China is run, but then again in every country even democratic ones you cannot hope to satisfy everyone.

The important thing is for all sides to understand each other and accomadate each others difficult and different point of views.

I think the reason why Taiwan is not willing to unify with China is like you said that they have gotten used to the form of government of Taiwan and embraces democracy. I think this requires time and patience.

The situation you could say could be compared with Hong Kong and Macau on the economic front. Due to the fact that Hong Kong and Macau have their own well established economic framework prior handover, it would not work if it intergrates with the current economic policy of China. China also recognises this fact, therefore now, Hong Kong and Macau have their own system, totally independent from China, hence the designation Special Administrive Region (S.A.R.) and HK people ruling HK and Macau people running Macau respectively.

China has proposed to Taiwan this framework where Taiwanese people would run Taiwan independently. All China want in return for this proposal is Taiwan's recognition that it is part of China under one nation (Greater China).

Unfortunately this is rejected by the Taiwan government under many reasons. Therefore, negotiations are needed inorder to find a peaceful solution. :)

[Kiaar]

I understand some people might not like the form of government in China or how China is run, but then again in every country even democratic ones you cannot hope to satisfy everyone.

The important thing is for all sides to understand each other and accomadate each others difficult and different point of views.

I think the reason why Taiwan is not willing to unify with China is like you said that they have gotten used to the form of government of Taiwan and embraces democracy. I think this requires time and patience.

The situation you could say could be compared with Hong Kong and Macau on the economic front. Due to the fact that Hong Kong and Macau have their own well established economic framework prior handover, it would not work if it intergrates with the current economic policy of China. China also recognises this fact, therefore now, Hong Kong and Macau have their own system, totally independent from China, hence the designation Special Administrive Region (S.A.R.) and HK people ruling HK and Macau people running Macau respectively.

China has proposed to Taiwan this framework where Taiwanese people would run Taiwan independently. All China want in return for this proposal is Taiwan's recognition that it is part of China under one nation (Greater China).

Unfortunately this is rejected by the Taiwan government under many reasons. Therefore, negotiations are needed inorder to find a peaceful solution. :)

Very interesting, I didn't know that.

It does seem though that China is improving (in the eyes of a Westerner) in terms of freedoms/rights, so I imagine within a few decades Taiwan could certainly be more interested if China continues along this path. But, no one knows the future, so we'll have to see.

[Sinosphere]

Very interesting, I didn't know that.

It does seem though that China is improving (in the eyes of a Westerner) in terms of freedoms/rights, so I imagine within a few decades Taiwan could certainly be more interested if China continues along this path. But, no one knows the future, so we'll have to see.

That is true, China is improving her freedoms and human rights especially with the Beijing Olympics next year. China places great importance on this event as this is an opportunity to show the world how China is like now.

This is because most people from other countries might still have the perception that China is still a backward country. Therefore, hopefully the Olympics would open their eyes and amaze them with the modernisation and advancement in China's infrastructure.

As a Chinese myself ofcourse I hope one day there would be an peaceful unification with Taiwan because I personally have many friends in Taiwan. Also, i don't want to see Chinese people and Taiwanese people in a military conflict, because in a war, people die, I really do not want that to happen.

I agree that no one knows the future, but hopefully the future is bright for the Chinese people. :)

[aryan]

because I personally have many friends in Taiwan.

Wow I have had chinese and taiwanese in my class and they don't get along ;-)..
Yes the fact is that China when it comes to economy is very open but when it comes to human rights its lacking...
Hopefully it changes and changes for the better.
I am of the opinion that democracy is better than communism but in case of China let the good thing continue...

[Musa a.s.]

The U.S. has ALWAYS been a hypocritical flying magic in your face nation.
Nobody American(with our short and selective memories) seem to remember what we've ALL been taught in the third grade about Manifest Destiny.

[Sinosphere]

Wow I have had chinese and taiwanese in my class and they don't get along ;-)..


It is unfortunate to hear this, but in my view, friends should not be based on religion or race alone. I think it is important to be sober and rational about it in situations with people who not necessary share your views, this is after all what makes us all individual and unique.

In my opinion, if you have a valid point and/or I understand your reasoning from your past knowledge and experience, then I would accept your arguments and/or claims.

Most important in a discussion is that the people involved could accomadate each others opinions without bias or backgrounds. I think this is the reason I get along with everyone. :)


Yes the fact is that China when it comes to economy is very open but when it comes to human rights its lacking...
Hopefully it changes and changes for the better.


I agree that the economy in China is very open, this is because China believes in free market and desires this if it wants her economy to grow at double digit rates. Hopefully this growth continues for the benefits of the Chinese people and the world.

I understand that human rights is still an issue but China is already making progress. I think the world must understand that the populations of China and the land mass of the country is so big, it is very difficult to improve this in very short time as demanded by western human rights groups. China wants the world to understand that inorder for the country to be growing and prosperous the citizens are very important. Therefore, be rest assured that China is doing all she can to improve the situation, China just needs patience and time.

I also hope in the future the situation would change for the better. In my opinion I see a bright future for the Chinese nation.


I am of the opinion that democracy is better than communism but in case of China let the good thing continue...

I don't agree that democracy is better than communism and vice versa, but I respect your opinion. In my opinion they are both different forms of government and whichever suits the country, then persist with that form. In other words, it is "different" rather than "better".

First, we must understand what it means by "democracy" I am not targeting the US, but let me give you a simple example:

The US, like a world police telling countries around the world what they "can do" and what they "can't do" is that democracy? is that the so-called freedom and free will?

Hope you understand what I am trying to say, if not, apologies there.

I stress once again, I am not targeting the US, but that was a simple example for my explanation.

Communism I don't think is a negative form of government, it really depends how each person looks at it. It is ofcourse different to a democracy but it could still work efficiently and adapted.

An example for this is China herself, she is growing, economically and prospering at a very fast pace. It is also termed that this Century is the Asian century involving China and India. This is due to the fact China is leading Asia's economy. The Chinese population is getting richer and many people have been lifted out of poverty and an ever fast increase in middle class. Chinese people are enjoying more luxury, hence the vast amount of foreign companies investing in China and opening branches. All this is the success of the leadership of the communist party.

So as you see it's really hard to defrentiate which is better which in my view cannot be compared. All I could say is that they are both "different" rather than one better than the other.

Again, hope you undertstand what I am trying to say, if not, apologies again.

Thank you for reading my reply. :)

[aryan]

Nihao ma sinosphere...

It is unfortunate to hear this, but in my view, friends should not be based on religion or race alone. I think it is important to be sober and rational about it in situations with people who not necessary share your views, this is after all what makes us all individual and unique.[/quot]

I agree..

[QUOTE]In my opinion, if you have a valid point and/or I understand your reasoning from your past knowledge and experience, then I would accept your arguments and/or claims.

But you must realize that people have their own prejudices which colour their opinion and not everyone from a hostile country will be friendly with you and vice versa..


Most important in a discussion is that the people involved could accomadate each others opinions without bias or backgrounds. I think this is the reason I get along with everyone. :)

Not being modest eh? :roflmao3:
Or you are non-controversial and weak .. just kidding. :roflmao3:. Actually a nice trait to have... kudos to you..

I agree that the economy in China is very open, this is because China believes in free market and desires this if it wants her economy to grow at double digit rates. Hopefully this growth continues for the benefits of the Chinese people and the world.

I agree but again the China is a closed country when it comes to information but I hope the permits reqd to visit cities and other such practises should be done away with.. I am actually a staunch supporter of the Chinese govt and would have loved to see a dictator in India post independence for a few years to make the Indians more proud and break the shackles of the servitudial(is it a new invention?) attitude (servant kind of attitude)...

I understand that human rights is still an issue but China is already making progress. I think the world must understand that the populations of China and the land mass of the country is so big, it is very difficult to improve this in very short time as demanded by western human rights groups. China wants the world to understand that inorder for the country to be growing and prosperous the citizens are very important. Therefore, be rest assured that China is doing all she can to improve the situation, China just needs patience and time.

The question of religion and freedom are important to address but don't worry China is too strong now to follow any one's advice :smile1:. Yes I agree they take time but Sinosphere do you think is the govt responsible??
I mean can the govt justify spending billions of dollars in building the shanghai's maglev train???? Justify in censoring the net?? justify in occupying tibet?? justify in dictating 1 child policy??? justified in not allowing religions to propagate??

So if you are against such policies you pretty much cannot do anything even though China is a communist country.. I am not saying it is bad but you can not object to it which is against the fundamental right of a human being that is liberty...


I also hope in the future the situation would change for the better. In my opinion I see a bright future for the Chinese nation.

I agree too... hope that some Indian politicians learns the chinese example.
There was an interesting news report on india versus china on bbc.. further an Indian politician visited China and saw a brand new 8 lane highway which had no visible cars. He asked his chinese counterpart that why did you build this road when you don't have cars? The chinese politician replied that first we build roads then cars unlike India.. Impressive...

I don't agree that democracy is better than communism and vice versa, but I respect your opinion. In my opinion they are both different forms of government and whichever suits the country, then persist with that form. In other words, it is "different" rather than "better".

See no form of govt is by default perfect the kind of communism practised by China is much different than say the kind practised by USSR and the democractic setup for eg followed by UK and USA both are again different. So you have to adjust till you reach the perfect match suited to your people and country..
So in that I agree with you...


First, we must understand what it means by "democracy" I am not targeting the US, but let me give you a simple example:

The US, like a world police telling countries around the world what they "can do" and what they "can't do" is that democracy? is that the so-called freedom and free will?

Hope you understand what I am trying to say, if not, apologies there.

I stress once again, I am not targeting the US, but that was a simple example for my explanation.

Well of course democracy doesnot give you right to change the world. Don't mind but it was an ineffective example :roflmao3:
For eg. Sri Lanka is a democracy what has it done on the world platform?
That is more of a question of foreign policy than democracy and ignorant voters and politician debate...

Communism I don't think is a negative form of government, it really depends how each person looks at it. It is ofcourse different to a democracy but it could still work efficiently and adapted.

An example for this is China herself, she is growing, economically and prospering at a very fast pace. It is also termed that this Century is the Asian century involving China and India. This is due to the fact China is leading Asia's economy. The Chinese population is getting richer and many people have been lifted out of poverty and an ever fast increase in middle class. Chinese people are enjoying more luxury, hence the vast amount of foreign companies investing in China and opening branches. All this is the success of the leadership of the communist party.

YEs I agree. The progress that CHina has made in alleviating poverty has no precedent in the world... Hats off to you...
But at the same time look at Tibet... outside the scope of this discussion.. but the spectacular rise of China, ma'am has been nothing short of spectacular..
Yet being an indophile to the core I think India needs 1 good leader to actually take the fight to China...(phrase not real fighting :roflmao3:)

So as you see it's really hard to defrentiate which is better which in my view cannot be compared. All I could say is that they are both "different" rather than one better than the other.

Again, hope you undertstand what I am trying to say, if not, apologies again.

Thank you for reading my reply. :)

Well I agree with you that it is not question of being better but being suited to a particular country. As the Indian philosphers say the difference between good and pleasant is that good is not always pleasant and what is pleasant is not always good...

Anyways you have perfected the art of sychophancy.. :roflmao3:
shishi for replying..
So long...

[Sinosphere]

Thank you for your reply.


But you must realize that people have their own prejudices which colour their opinion and not everyone from a hostile country will be friendly with you and vice versa..


I agree, this is what makes us all different and unique, but in my view for example, if I meet someone that is anti-Chinese, then I would still try to communicate with them and try to understand their reasons.

I understand that not always people would be friendly towards you, but in my view, if you want people to be friendly with you, you must be friendly to them first.

Apologies if I am boring you, but this is how I was brought up by my parents. "If you want people to be nice to you, you must first be nice to them" :)


Not being modest eh? :roflmao3:
Or you are non-controversial and weak .. just kidding. :roflmao3:. Actually a nice trait to have... kudos to you..


I don't think I am being modest, I am just being myself and say the things that I wanted to say.


I agree but again the China is a closed country when it comes to information but I hope the permits reqd to visit cities and other such practises should be done away with.. I am actually a staunch supporter of the Chinese govt and would have loved to see a dictator in India post independence for a few years to make the Indians more proud and break the shackles of the servitudial(is it a new invention?) attitude (servant kind of attitude)...


There are limitations regarding information within China, I think this is understandable due to the fact that the government still worries about some instability within the country. I can tell you there are limitations regarding information in other countries too including western nations. The citizens might/might not know it, but it is there.


The question of religion and freedom are important to address but don't worry China is too strong now to follow any one's advice :smile1:. Yes I agree they take time but Sinosphere do you think is the govt responsible??
I mean can the govt justify spending billions of dollars in building the shanghai's maglev train???? Justify in censoring the net?? justify in occupying tibet?? justify in dictating 1 child policy??? justified in not allowing religions to propagate??


Religion and Freedom is a difficult issue to just explain in a few paragraphs. In my view, the people is the responsibility of the government. If Religion and Freedom is important to the people, then I think the government has a responsibility, but not a binded responsibility.

China desires happy citizens and if these issues could bring happiness then it is correct to pursue this path.

Regarding the maglev train, I think the justification cannot be determined by a single person like me, but I can tell you this. The justification can be viewed like this, on one side, we have a large middle class who supports this project and demands luxury and advancement. On the otherside, we have the poor or rights groups that say the project damages the environment and the money should be better spent on other projects.

So, you could see we have two different parties FOR and AGAINST it, it all depends on priorities of the state and balancing the parties.


So if you are against such policies you pretty much cannot do anything even though China is a communist country.. I am not saying it is bad but you can not object to it which is against the fundamental right of a human being that is liberty...

I would say the people in China has liberty and rights, but with some limitations as mentioned earlier. This requires time and patience for the better in the future. Overall, the people are prosperous and satisfied with their lifes.


I agree too... hope that some Indian politicians learns the chinese example.
There was an interesting news report on india versus china on bbc.. further an Indian politician visited China and saw a brand new 8 lane highway which had no visible cars. He asked his chinese counterpart that why did you build this road when you don't have cars? The chinese politician replied that first we build roads then cars unlike India.. Impressive...


Thank you for this compliment.

I don't think I can comment what is best for India on politics as I am not familiar with India's current situations. This is because I think nobody would understand India as clear as the people who live there. I respect this point.

I also heard in the news around the world that India is being compared to China. I personally think this is a good sign because this means that the world recognises the importance of China and India. We are both large and fast emerging nations the future for the two nations can only get better and better.

Regarding the highway, this is because the infrastructure policy of China is based on Bttom-U and India's is Top-Dwn. In China we always believe in the importance of a strong foundation in everything we do. We always remember this quote "We learn to walk before we learn to run".

Here is a typical example, China's public wanted the Chinese space program to plan and research to make a landing on Mars instead of the Moon, this is because the US has already landed on the Moon. The Chinese Space Agency has indicated that we must progress slowly and not be hasty, China respects the US space prgram with it's amount of experience. Therefore, we like to follow the footsteps of the US. Hence the Moon first and then maybe Mars is we are capable.

China is also very impressed with India's progress on modernisation of infrastructure and the economic achievements. China hopes India would join with them in realising this century is the Asian Century.


See no form of govt is by default perfect the kind of communism practised by China is much different than say the kind practised by USSR and the democractic setup for eg followed by UK and USA both are again different. So you have to adjust till you reach the perfect match suited to your people and country..
So in that I agree with you...


The former USSR, UK and USA are all great nations in the world. I am sure the leaderships would understand what system of government is best for them. China respect non interference in others affairs.


Well of course democracy doesnot give you right to change the world. Don't mind but it was an ineffective example :roflmao3:
For eg. Sri Lanka is a democracy what has it done on the world platform?
That is more of a question of foreign policy than democracy and ignorant voters and politician debate...


This is unfortunate news for Sri Lanka, but China hopes other countries especially developing countries would be better in the future and lifting their people out of poverty.


YEs I agree. The progress that CHina has made in alleviating poverty has no precedent in the world... Hats off to you...
But at the same time look at Tibet... outside the scope of this discussion.. but the spectacular rise of China, ma'am has been nothing short of spectacular..
Yet being an indophile to the core I think India needs 1 good leader to actually take the fight to China...(phrase not real fighting :roflmao3:)


It is true that China has lifted millions out of poverty. Tibet is an area the government is trying to improve with modernisation of its infrastructure to benefit the people of Tibet like public transport, hospitals and school. However, this is a difficult task because on one hand China is trying to improve the quality of life in Tibet, but at the same time we get protests that the projects would affect the religious values of Tibet. So you see, we are in a difficult situation. China hopes a compromise could be realised.

China sees India as an impressive country due to its strong economy and rapid growing service sector especially the IT sector.

China recognises that India is an important player in the South Asian region and the world.

As for a good leader for India, I think this is best to be decided by the Indian people. Only they would know who is the most suited candidate.


Well I agree with you that it is not question of being better but being suited to a particular country. As the Indian philosphers say the difference between good and pleasant is that good is not always pleasant and what is pleasant is not always good...

Anyways you have perfected the art of sychophancy.. :roflmao3:
shishi for replying..
So long...

I totally agree with the Indian philosopher. :)

[aryan]

Thank you for your reply.



I agree, this is what makes us all different and unique, but in my view for example, if I meet someone that is anti-Chinese, then I would still try to communicate with them and try to understand their reasons.


Very patient of you. unless i am incredibly bored or excited I'll let it pass..


I understand that not always people would be friendly towards you, but in my view, if you want people to be friendly with you, you must be friendly to them first.

nah if you are hot! i guess everyone will be friendly with you!! LOL...
I guess this where the difference between emotions in a man and woman creep up. woman are far more tolerant and emotional than a man...So sorry have to go with the testosterone on this 1...


Apologies if I am boring you, but this is how I was brought up by my parents. "If you want people to be nice to you, you must first be nice to them" :)

I don't think I am being modest, I am just being myself and say the things that I wanted to say.

no apologies I am quite the opposite and hopefully I too can be nicer than what I am from interacting with other nice people like yourself ;-)


There are limitations regarding information within China, I think this is understandable due to the fact that the government still worries about some instability within the country. I can tell you there are limitations regarding information in other countries too including western nations. The citizens might/might not know it, but it is there.


Well you can argue but there are more limitations in China for sure, agreed?


Religion and Freedom is a difficult issue to just explain in a few paragraphs. In my view, the people is the responsibility of the government. If Religion and Freedom is important to the people, then I think the government has a responsibility, but not a binded responsibility.

On the contrary the country and its citizens both are the responsiblity of the govt. Freedom is the most important thing to man for he is ordained a free will. religion can be curbed but curbing freedom makes us no different from living in zoos. So yes freedom is far more important than religion and must be ensured...


China desires happy citizens and if these issues could bring happiness then it is correct to pursue this path.


happiness is subjective. Some people are happy in poverty too. some sick people like getting beaten up Sadist masochist crap.. but anyways to support my point . My opinion China desires prosperity for the people and power and importance for the country but prosperity does not bring happiness .. I can be wrong ..........

Regarding the maglev train, I think the justification cannot be determined by a single person like me, but I can tell you this. The justification can be viewed like this, on one side, we have a large middle class who supports this project and demands luxury and advancement. On the otherside, we have the poor or rights groups that say the project damages the environment and the money should be better spent on other projects.


In china ma'am irresp of what people desire, it is what the govt desires that gets done. Personally I am pro-maglev train gets the jawdropping of all idiot westerners as to how an Asian country could do that. Respect.. My views again...


So, you could see we have two different parties FOR and AGAINST it, it all depends on priorities of the state and balancing the parties.

C'mon you are being idealistical... The Chinese govt is not answerable to the people which is not always a bad thing as I have said. If the dominant faction in the govt believes that the project is good for whatever reason showoff, usefulness etc. it gets done isn't it???


I would say the people in China has liberty and rights, but with some limitations as mentioned earlier. This requires time and patience for the better in the future. Overall, the people are prosperous and satisfied with their lifes.

agreed


Thank you for this compliment.

You are most welcome..

I don't think I can comment what is best for India on politics as I am not familiar with India's current situations. This is because I think nobody would understand India as clear as the people who live there. I respect this point.


Excellent views..


I also heard in the news around the world that India is being compared to China. I personally think this is a good sign because this means that the world recognises the importance of China and India. We are both large and fast emerging nations the future for the two nations can only get better and better.


news hahaha switch to google scholar it is flooded... China obviously has the advantages and is the clear winner though the Indian me refuses not to give up with out a good challenge.. lol..


Regarding the highway, this is because the infrastructure policy of China is based on Bttom-U and India's is Top-Dwn. In China we always believe in the importance of a strong foundation in everything we do. We always remember this quote "We learn to walk before we learn to run".


Very well said..
I am off the opinion more than b-u / t-d its curative / preventive approach but yeah you make eminent sense..



Here is a typical example, China's public wanted the Chinese space program to plan and research to make a landing on Mars instead of the Moon, this is because the US has already landed on the Moon. The Chinese Space Agency has indicated that we must progress slowly and not be hasty, China respects the US space prgram with it's amount of experience. Therefore, we like to follow the footsteps of the US. Hence the Moon first and then maybe Mars is we are capable.


Cool... You are a PR officer for the Chinese govt or what.. hahahaha...


China is also very impressed with India's progress on modernisation of infrastructure and the economic achievements. China hopes India would join with them in realising this century is the Asian Century.


Indeed it is the century of the Chinese dragon and the indian tiger,..


The former USSR, UK and USA are all great nations in the world. I am sure the leaderships would understand what system of government is best for them. China respect non interference in others affairs.


But not everyone will act like China.. esp the EU, US WTO.


This is unfortunate news for Sri Lanka, but China hopes other countries especially developing countries would be better in the future and lifting their people out of poverty.


You have put me out of context this was a point I made to differentiate the difference between democracy and foreign policy...



It is true that China has lifted millions out of poverty. Tibet is an area the government is trying to improve with modernisation of its infrastructure to benefit the people of Tibet like public transport, hospitals and school. However, this is a difficult task because on one hand China is trying to improve the quality of life in Tibet, but at the same time we get protests that the projects would affect the religious values of Tibet. So you see, we are in a difficult situation. China hopes a compromise could be realised.


Tibetans have an exiled-govt based in India. they claim china has sent the majority ethnic group(world's largest actually) into Tibet to disrupt the ethnic balance. Further the Chinese govt has indulged in some severe human rights violations in Tibet..
Again this is not my area of interest but just raising a point....
To be honest all this Tibet fiasco is to be blamed on our stupid PM. Nehru who gave up Tibet to China... anyways I have veered off topic..possibly in some other thread we can pick up this topic...


China sees India as an impressive country due to its strong economy and rapid growing service sector especially the IT sector.


Indians are more impressed with Chinese and China...


China recognises that India is an important player in the South Asian region and the world.


Well I for one treat China as a much greater player in the region but China has also been wary of India for whatever reason it has been.. not that the Indians are not suspicious of the Chinese. I feel the 2 nations should mend their bridges. India and China have much to offer to each other. India realises that China is too big to be anyone's proxy and the China should acknowledge the
same.

China has tried to project its power akin to USSR and USA of yore during cold war by supporting Pakistan. This has increased concerns in India.

Further the Maoists parties of Nepal and India receive Chinese patronage and are responsible for many illegal activities this has further made Indians wary of Chinese.

Historically the topic of Tibet, Arunachal pradesh and 1965 war will always make the govt suspicious of each other. but the people to people contact and goodwill is tremendous..


As for a good leader for India, I think this is best to be decided by the Indian people. Only they would know who is the most suited candidate.


well the most suitable candidate does not always win. For eg the current PM, manmohan Singh, is considered one of the best PM of India yet he has never won an election. He is a nominated member... Perils of democracy if one may say so...


I totally agree with the Indian philosopher. :)
[/quote]
I think Chinese women are hot ... hahahaha... ;-)

[Sinosphere]

Very patient of you. unless i am incredibly bored or excited I'll let it pass..


Thanks for your compliments, I think patience is an important quality for a person. :)


nah if you are hot! i guess everyone will be friendly with you!! LOL...
I guess this where the difference between emotions in a man and woman creep up. woman are far more tolerant and emotional than a man...So sorry have to go with the testosterone on this 1...


I am not sure about how a man thinks, but I agree that a man and a woman thinks very differently. Most important is for both to be accomadating and understand each others emotions.


no apologies I am quite the opposite and hopefully I too can be nicer than what I am from interacting with other nice people like yourself ;-)


I think it is important to be nice to others without preconditions, everyone likes to be treated nicely. Inorder to do that we must take the first step and be nice to others before expecting others to be nice to us.


Well you can argue but there are more limitations in China for sure, agreed?


Absolutely, in any opinion or situations there are different views which could be argued from many sides. Key thing is to respect others views and accept them from their perspective. Argument for a point is easy, understanding and accepting other view is difficult :)


On the contrary the country and its citizens both are the responsiblity of the govt. Freedom is the most important thing to man for he is ordained a free will. religion can be curbed but curbing freedom makes us no different from living in zoos. So yes freedom is far more important than religion and must be ensured...


The country is always the responsibility of the inhabitants, for the country is the home and the history of the people. I would agree that freedom would be more important than religion. I would class them as primary and secondary needs respectively.

I understand curbing freedom and religion is not supported, but we must understand the limits of curbing varies from different people. Freedom is a complicated word to define, therefore comparing freedom with zoo would be not practical.

I think there is no such thing as total freedom.


happiness is subjective. Some people are happy in poverty too. some sick people like getting beaten up Sadist masochist crap.. but anyways to support my point . My opinion China desires prosperity for the people and power and importance for the country but prosperity does not bring happiness .. I can be wrong ..........


Happiness is a precious feeling that cannot be explained. I absolutely agree that people can be happy in poverty, this depends on the happiness requirement from each person. Some people might be happy when they are rich, for some, they might be happy when they are close to their family.

China desires prosperity for sure for its people, they believe prosperity would bring more happiness to the people.


In china ma'am irresp of what people desire, it is what the govt desires that gets done. Personally I am pro-maglev train gets the jawdropping of all idiot westerners as to how an Asian country could do that. Respect.. My views again...


In a company, you would have leaders such as CEO and the MD, they would normally determine the future and goals of the company. Once the goals and objectives are determined, the leaders would pass this down to the employees and they would accept regardless whether you agree or not.

This situation you could apply to your comment. The leaders must make the initiative to lead the country and people to new achievements, in this case the leaders is the government. The employees would be the citizens, they would have to accept the leaders decisions to improvements. The maglev would be a good example where the project is what the government wants aswell as what the citizens (middle class) wants.


C'mon you are being idealistical... The Chinese govt is not answerable to the people which is not always a bad thing as I have said. If the dominant faction in the govt believes that the project is good for whatever reason showoff, usefulness etc. it gets done isn't it???


Although the Chinese government is a one ruling party. whatever decisions and/or projects would be discussed and voted. You could say there are many parties under one name. I understand some decisions might not be supported by the people, but I would refer this back to my view that it is not possible to satisfy everyone. In decisions making, you would most likely to encounter people for it and people against it. This is an unavoidable situation.


news hahaha switch to google scholar it is flooded... China obviously has the advantages and is the clear winner though the Indian me refuses not to give up with out a good challenge.. lol..


China is progressing smoothly and is leading India, but I believe India is also making good progress and hope this challenge as you have indicated would motivate India even more and make even faster progress in the future. :)


Very well said..
I am off the opinion more than b-u / t-d its curative / preventive approach but yeah you make eminent sense..


I think the method is only important if it applies and is best suited for the countries current modernising goals and situation. China believes the Bottom-Up method is best suited for her and maybe Top-Down is best suited for India.


Cool... You are a PR officer for the Chinese govt or what.. hahahaha...


Thank you for your comments, I don't think I am a PR because I don't think I have the qualities to be a PR. I prefer to use examples and comparisons to help me explain my thoughts to others, hopefully this way people would understand my thoughts better. :)


Indeed it is the century of the Chinese dragon and the indian tiger,..


I think this century is a important timeline for China and India.


But not everyone will act like China.. esp the EU, US WTO.


I understand different countries have different views and ways of doing things, China does not expect every nation to do things the same as China. China understand this and respects this.


You have put me out of context this was a point I made to differentiate the difference between democracy and foreign policy...


I understand now, thanks for explaining.


Tibetans have an exiled-govt based in India. they claim china has sent the majority ethnic group(world's largest actually) into Tibet to disrupt the ethnic balance. Further the Chinese govt has indulged in some severe human rights violations in Tibet..
Again this is not my area of interest but just raising a point....
To be honest all this Tibet fiasco is to be blamed on our stupid PM. Nehru who gave up Tibet to China... anyways I have veered off topic..possibly in some other thread we can pick up this topic...


I think the claim of sending in the Han (majority ethnic group) to distrup the balance is groundless. It is true that there is an increase of Han people in Tibet, but they are engaged in projects and other infrastructure work. China is modernising the infrastructure of Tibet by building public services for the benefit of the people of Tibet.

China does not want the western provinces, especially Tibet to lose out on the fruits of China's economic boom enjoyed by the eastern and southern provinces.

China believes Tibet is more of a religious province and the people there might not have the skills or specialty of operating the projects, hence the influx of Han engineers and professional workers.

In regards to Nehru, I can't comment whether he is a good leader or not, I'll leave that to the people of India to decide. I think Nehru gave up Tibet to China is because it was part of a deal agreed between China and India. India recognises Tibet as an integral part of China and China recognises Sikkim to be part of India.

China also took the initiative to present the new map clearly indicating Sikkim as part of India to the Indian leaders. This was an unprecedented gesture from the Chinese government which India praised.


Indians are more impressed with Chinese and China...


Thank you for this view. Equally China is impressed with India fast modernisation.


Well I for one treat China as a much greater player in the region but China has also been wary of India for whatever reason it has been.. not that the Indians are not suspicious of the Chinese. I feel the 2 nations should mend their bridges. India and China have much to offer to each other. India realises that China is too big to be anyone's proxy and the China should acknowledge the same.


I think Sino-Indo suspicions are understandable, they are both neighbours with a vast population therefore competition and rivalry is unavoidable. This often leads to small conflicts, this is unfortunate, but its part of politics.

I agree that Sino-Indo relations should be mended and improved for the benefits of the future of the two nations.

At this current situation with a strong economy and a fast modernisation of the armed forces i agree that China cannot be anyones proxy.


China has tried to project its power akin to USSR and USA of yore during cold war by supporting Pakistan. This has increased concerns in India.


Pakistan is a close friend and neighbour of China, that would not change.

I think the reason why India is concerned of good Sino-Pak relations is because it is rooted in the bitter history between India and Pakistan. This is unfortunate, but India must understand this famous quote "Your enemy is not necessary my enemy" Also, Pakistan has been a good friend of China for a very long time.

China only hopes the Indo-Pak relations would improve inorder to neatralise the neighbourly suspicions between Sino-Indo and Indo-Pak relations.


Further the Maoists parties of Nepal and India receive Chinese patronage and are responsible for many illegal activities this has further made Indians wary of Chinese.


This is unfortunate but Maoist rebels idolises China's former leader Chairman Mao. However, their actions and activities are not supported by the Chinese government. Rebels causes instability and China has instability herself, therefore China understands the concerns.

The only thing to do is bilateral consultations on the matter.


Historically the topic of Tibet, Arunachal pradesh and 1965 war will always make the govt suspicious of each other. but the people to people contact and goodwill is tremendous..


I think the issue of Tibet is no longer a concern for China and India as it is resolved as mentioned earlier. Arunachal Pradesh is an obstacle in the Sino-Indo relations, best thing to do is to continue negotiations on the matter. The 1965 border conflict is unfortunate, hope there is no conflict in the future between China and India.

I agree the people-people relations is very good, most people gets confused with the relations between governments-government and people-people relationships.


well the most suitable candidate does not always win. For eg the current PM, manmohan Singh, is considered one of the best PM of India yet he has never won an election. He is a nominated member... Perils of democracy if one may say so...


I agree that not always the most suited candidate would win, but then again "most suited" means different to different people. Best thing to do is to respect the winner whether it is your preferred choice or not.


I think Chinese women are hot ... hahahaha... ;-)


I thank you for this comment on behalf of all the Chinese women worldwide. :D

[techvipin]

Even I feel chinese girls are beautiful looking. I think china and india should start improving ties with a strong marital relationship :D :D
Pakistan is a close friend and neighbour of China, that would not change.

I think the reason why India is concerned of good Sino-Pak relations is because it is rooted in the bitter history between India and Pakistan. This is unfortunate, but India must understand this famous quote "Your enemy is not necessary my enemy" Also, Pakistan has been a good friend of China for a very long time.

China only hopes the Indo-Pak relations would improve inorder to neatralise the neighbourly suspicions between Sino-Indo and Indo-Pak relations.

I think a similar argument goes for indo - japan and indo - US relations and the former is a cause of the latter.

[Sinosphere]

Even I feel chinese girls are beautiful looking. I think china and india should start improving ties with a strong marital relationship :D :D


Thank you for your kind words and I agree with you that the Sino-Indo relations should be improved.

China desires good relations with her neighbours especially India. :)


I think a similar argument goes for indo - japan and indo - US relations and the former is a cause of the latter.


I am not sure about the trilateral relations between the US, India and Japan, but I hope the relations between them are good and stable for the benefit of the world.

[aryan]

I understand curbing freedom and religion is not supported, but we must understand the limits of curbing varies from different people. Freedom is a complicated word to define, therefore comparing freedom with zoo would be not practical.

I think there is no such thing as total freedom.


I'm commenting on the right to basic freedoms and fundamental rights which each govt should guarantee..


In a company, you would have leaders such as CEO and the MD, they would normally determine the future and goals of the company. Once the goals and objectives are determined, the leaders would pass this down to the employees and they would accept regardless whether you agree or not.


I think you are forgetting about the shareholders and the shareholder appointed directors...

Without shareholder approval nothing gets done in a company but we are talking about a country here...


This situation you could apply to your comment. The leaders must make the initiative to lead the country and people to new achievements, in this case the leaders is the government. The employees would be the citizens, they would have to accept the leaders decisions to improvements. The maglev would be a good example where the project is what the government wants aswell as what the citizens (middle class) wants.

See leaders in a democracy and the govt itself is a guardian appointed by the public. So they can only do things which are good for all not just one class..
Hence things take slowly to happen in a democracy because you have to justify them to all.

So in that I feel you are equating normal chinese in a very menial way hope that is not true..


Although the Chinese government is a one ruling party. whatever decisions and/or projects would be discussed and voted. You could say there are many parties under one name. I understand some decisions might not be supported by the people, but I would refer this back to my view that it is not possible to satisfy everyone. In decisions making, you would most likely to encounter people for it and people against it. This is an unavoidable situation.

Simple let the people decide and let the majority win...This is way no one can be blamed and your actions are justified...


China is progressing smoothly and is leading India, but I believe India is also making good progress and hope this challenge as you have indicated would motivate India even more and make even faster progress in the future. :)

Well we say in India that we are doing well inspite of the govt.


I think the method is only important if it applies and is best suited for the countries current modernising goals and situation. China believes the Bottom-Up method is best suited for her and maybe Top-Down is best suited for India.


Nope prevention is always better than cure.. So Chinese approach is better suited to one and all..


I think this century is a important timeline for China and India.

I think in all centuries India and China have been important to others but for the first time important in shaping the world with their own leaders and for their own good..


I understand different countries have different views and ways of doing things, China does not expect every nation to do things the same as China. China understand this and respects this.


Well they will cause trouble for all countries are supposed to follow certain international norms right? and the Eu countries etc. will demand a curb on the Govt censhorship etc...


I think the claim of sending in the Han (majority ethnic group) to distrup the balance is groundless. It is true that there is an increase of Han people in Tibet, but they are engaged in projects and other infrastructure work. China is modernising the infrastructure of Tibet by building public services for the benefit of the people of Tibet.

Well majority of the people say they are happy as it is and want the atheist Chinese govt to let them be and let them practice their religion..


China does not want the western provinces, especially Tibet to lose out on the fruits of China's economic boom enjoyed by the eastern and southern provinces.

Well I don't think economic prosperity compensates for persecution..


China believes Tibet is more of a religious province and the people there might not have the skills or specialty of operating the projects, hence the influx of Han engineers and professional workers.


Absolutely Tibet is the cradle of sprituality and Tibetans are happy with what they have.. One should not try to change all . I think China should let Tibet be...

I think Nehru gave up Tibet to China is because it was part of a deal agreed between China and India.
India at the time was a socialist country like China and he wanted to foster a better alliance with them but sadly it never happened and till now the Chinese and Indian govt are wary of each other esp because of the diff forms of govt and decision making..
But the people to people contact has been excellent and so has the trade relation..

India recognises Tibet as an integral part of China and China recognises Sikkim to be part of India.

What about Arunachal Pradesh?

China also took the initiative to present the new map clearly indicating Sikkim as part of India to the Indian leaders. This was an unprecedented gesture from the Chinese government which India praised.

Well yeah I read about it. India not only recognises Tibet as Chinese but has also never asked for the occupied territories of Kashmir under Chinese governance..


I think Sino-Indo suspicions are understandable, they are both neighbours with a vast population therefore competition and rivalry is unavoidable. This often leads to small conflicts, this is unfortunate, but its part of politics.

Mostly Indians have an issue with China supporting Pakistan for its own motivations...

India you must acknowledge has never attacked any other nation first since history has been recorded and the Chinese support to Pakistan has sent alarm bells ringing in New Delhi..

Pakistan is a close friend and neighbour of China, that would not change.

Pakistan and China are friendly because of one reason both are suspicious of India.. the same way India is suspicious of them both..


I think the reason why India is concerned of good Sino-Pak relations is because it is rooted in the bitter history between India and Pakistan.



China attacked India on a border dispute some 40 years back.
Pakistan has had 4 wars with India..
So India has had bitter experiences with both and the fact is that Pakistan gave away a land the size of a European country to China which originally belonged to India has also made them vary of the motives of friendliness between the two...


This is unfortunate, but India must understand this famous quote "Your enemy is not necessary my enemy" Also, Pakistan has been a good friend of China for a very long time.

Enemy's enemy is a friend is more like it in case of Pakistan and China wrt India.


China only hopes the Indo-Pak relations would improve inorder to neatralise the neighbourly suspicions between Sino-Indo and Indo-Pak relations.

Likewise..
I don't think India has any official problems with China at least..


This is unfortunate but Maoist rebels idolises China's former leader Chairman Mao. However, their actions and activities are not supported by the Chinese government.
Well the Mao rebels in China and India and so does the govt claim otherwise ..
I don't expect the Chinese govt to officially accept it though...


I think the issue of Tibet is no longer a concern for China and India as it is resolved as mentioned earlier. Arunachal Pradesh is an obstacle in the Sino-Indo relations, best thing to do is to continue negotiations on the matter.
India as a country has given up claim on Tibet but it wants to see Tibetans living in freedom rather than fear...


The 1965 border conflict is unfortunate, hope there is no conflict in the future between China and India.

Hope so too.


I thank you for this comment on behalf of all the Chinese women worldwide. :D

Can I have your number ;-) .. :roflmao3:

[aryan]

Even I feel chinese girls are beautiful looking. I think china and india should start improving ties with a strong marital relationship :D :D

Thank you for your kind words and I agree with you that the Sino-Indo relations should be improved.

China desires good relations with her neighbours especially India. :)


So do we but techvipin meant otherwise.. Marital here means marriage not martial which means army etc..

I think a similar argument goes for indo - japan and indo - US relations and the former is a cause of the latter.


I am not sure about the trilateral relations between the US, India and Japan, but I hope the relations between them are good and stable for the benefit of the world.


hahaha... ek taraf gharwali ek taraf bharawli( on 1 side is the wife on the other the girlfriend) hahaha

[Sinosphere]

I think you are forgetting about the shareholders and the shareholder appointed directors...

Without shareholder approval nothing gets done in a company but we are talking about a country here...


I know we are talking about a country, I was using a company to help with my explanation.


See leaders in a democracy and the govt itself is a guardian appointed by the public. So they can only do things which are good for all not just one class..
Hence things take slowly to happen in a democracy because you have to justify them to all.

So in that I feel you are equating normal chinese in a very menial way hope that is not true..


I think you are mistaken with my comments, what I am trying to say is that a governments decisions are to benefit the people, but it cannot hope to satisfy everyone.


Simple let the people decide and let the majority win...This is way no one can be blamed and your actions are justified...


When there is a project or debate, there would be a voting within the party and the majority would decide the outcome.


Well we say in India that we are doing well inspite of the govt.


Please could you tell me what you mean by "inspite of the government"?


Nope prevention is always better than cure.. So Chinese approach is better suited to one and all..


The result shows that the Bottom-Up methods best suits China. Do you think Top-Down has worked for India?


I think in all centuries India and China have been important to others but for the first time important in shaping the world with their own leaders and for their own good..


Agreed, this is truely a good moment for both China and India.


Well they will cause trouble for all countries are supposed to follow certain international norms right? and the Eu countries etc. will demand a curb on the Govt censhorship etc...


I agree that other countries has their own ways and may cause trouble to others but this is how the political game is played. You either play by the rules or suffer criticisms, tt is a cruel situation.


Well majority of the people say they are happy as it is and want the atheist Chinese govt to let them be and let them practice their religion..


I agree that Tibetans are happy with the current situation, but China has the obligation to implement infrastructure projects within Tibet. Tibetans could still carry on with their religious practices.


Well I don't think economic prosperity compensates for persecution..


I think enhancing the infrastructure by providing more and better public services like hospitals and schools could only benefit the Tibetans. I don't see how these improvements is persecuting anyone.

The only possibilty could be enviromentalist groups against such projects, but I would stick to my point that one's actions could not hope to satisfy everyone.


Absolutely Tibet is the cradle of sprituality and Tibetans are happy with what they have.. One should not try to change all . I think China should let Tibet be...


Tibet is a spiritual place and they are happy, that is true. But we must separate religious needs and practical needs. China is not trying to change Tibetan lifestyles for good, they are modernising the infrastructure within Tibet so when Tibetans requires a service, they would have access to it.

An example would be hospitals, if Tibetans are very sick or caught a deadly virus, do you think spiritual prayers would save them? that is not practical. I am not disrespecting the Tibetan religious values, that was an example.


India at the time was a socialist country like China and he wanted to foster a better alliance with them but sadly it never happened and till now the Chinese and Indian govt are wary of each other esp because of the diff forms of govt and decision making..
But the people to people contact has been excellent and so has the trade relation..


Agreed, this is unfortunate, but hopefully the wariness would disappear in the future.


What about Arunachal Pradesh?


I think AP is a complicated issue for China and India. Best thing to to leave it to the two nations for discussions and consultations.


Well yeah I read about it. India not only recognises Tibet as Chinese but has also never asked for the occupied territories of Kashmir under Chinese governance..


Yes, this is ideally a good thing for both China and India.


Mostly Indians have an issue with China supporting Pakistan for its own motivations...

India you must acknowledge has never attacked any other nation first since history has been recorded and the Chinese support to Pakistan has sent alarm bells ringing in New Delhi..

Pakistan and China are friendly because of one reason both are suspicious of India.. the same way India is suspicious of them both..


China supports Pakistan mainly is because China sees Pakistan as a true all weather friend, it is unfortunate that India thinks otherwise.

Agreed with the suspicions of each other, but this requires time and patience, hopefully the suspicions would decrease and eventually erased in the near future.


China attacked India on a border dispute some 40 years back.
Pakistan has had 4 wars with India..
So India has had bitter experiences with both and the fact is that Pakistan gave away a land the size of a European country to China which originally belonged to India has also made them vary of the motives of friendliness between the two...


In China we believe India provoked and/or attacked first in the border conflict. However I respect your views from the Indian point of view that China attacked first. I don't want to dwell on the debate who attacked first, but one thing is for sure, the border conflict is unfortunate and both sides should bear responsibility. The most important thing is not to have a second conflict.

Pakistan has had four wars with India, this is unfortunate. Hopefully there would not be another.

I think the giving of land to China from Pakistan is not correctly phrased. Kashmir is a disputed territory therefore no one is in a position to give anything. We could only say that it is temporary occupied until a solution has been found.


Enemy's enemy is a friend is more like it in case of Pakistan and China wrt India.


It is unfortunate that you phrase it like that. It has a similar meaning but a hostile intent.


Likewise..
I don't think India has any official problems with China at least..


This is good, likewise, I don't think China has any major problems with India.


Well the Mao rebels in China and India and so does the govt claim otherwise ..
I don't expect the Chinese govt to officially accept it though...


I think rebel groups is a problem for both China and India we would need to cooperate inorder to combat them.


India as a country has given up claim on Tibet but it wants to see Tibetans living in freedom rather than fear...


I don't think Tibetans are living in fear, I agree some might not be happy with the government. However, I refer to my point, one cannot hope to satisfy everyone.


Can I have your number ;-) .. :roflmao3:


I don't think it would be necessary. :D

[aryan]

I think you are mistaken with my comments, what I am trying to say is that a governments decisions are to benefit the people, but it cannot hope to satisfy everyone.

Of course but I was trying to point even in your company example that decisions are for the benefit of shareholders not company...


When there is a project or debate, there would be a voting within the party and the majority would decide the outcome.


I mean a common Chinese doesn't have a representative to represent it. For example the Yangtse Dam complex which was built has displaced million and is an ecological disaster and which none of the Chinese have condemned or opposed where as in India something happened at 1/1000 level of that Dam and there were strikes all over.


Please could you tell me what you mean by "inspite of the government"?


Because Indian govt is corrupt,unco-operative, taxes are high, bureaucracy is lazy, Raw materials in India are more expensive than China because of poor policies, labour laws are more strict than China, it takes more time to open a company in India than possibly a few African Nations, Laws regarding FDI are very stringent etc. Govt has not really done much to help the Indian economy.


The result shows that the Bottom-Up methods best suits China. Do you think Top-Down has worked for India?


Nope it does not work as well as the Chinese model..

I agree that Tibetans are happy with the current situation,

Nope

but China has the obligation to implement infrastructure projects within Tibet. Tibetans could still carry on with their religious practices.

See Tibetans prefer to live a very spartan life and attempts to change them will obviously make them unhappy.


I think enhancing the infrastructure by providing more and better public services like hospitals and schools could only benefit the Tibetans. I don't see how these improvements is persecuting anyone.


See no problems with hospitals etc. But they follow their on schooling system etc. These things should take time and should be in accordance with what Tibetans want. They are resisting both Sino and Western cultures. They are ethnically,culturally and linguistically distinct from Chinese and see all this as means of forcing of culture..

The only possibilty could be enviromentalist groups against such projects, but I would stick to my point that one's actions could not hope to satisfy everyone.

Well come to Dharamshala where the Tibet govt is in exile and ask them for yourseld. I don't think Chinese are allowed to access Tibetan govt's site from China? but you can try googling it.


Tibet is a spiritual place and they are happy, that is true. But we must separate religious needs and practical needs. China is not trying to change Tibetan lifestyles for good, they are modernising the infrastructure within Tibet so when Tibetans requires a service, they would have access to it.


See what you are saying I agree on paper but practically things are different.
Most Tibetans see Chinese as conquerors and Chinese govt in Tibet does not have a spectacular record as rulers..


An example would be hospitals, if Tibetans are very sick or caught a deadly virus, do you think spiritual prayers would save them? that is not practical.


Tibetans are some of the most advanced herbalists in the world and their system of natural medicine is possibly the most effective.

Philosophically no one can avoid what is in one's fate. Whether they be hospitals or herbs..

On the contrary Tibetans are a spiritual people they are lifes aims are much different from most people.


I am not disrespecting the Tibetan religious values, that was an example.


Understandable


Agreed, this is unfortunate, but hopefully the wariness would disappear in the future.


I hope its the nearer future rather than later.


I think AP is a complicated issue for China and India. Best thing to to leave it to the two nations for discussions and consultations.


Well from what I see is that it is a stalemate situation and China being the more magnanimous country in dealings with India will surely act like the "bigger man"


China supports Pakistan mainly is because China sees Pakistan as a true all weather friend, it is unfortunate that India thinks otherwise.


2 nations can never be true friends they can be allies till their objectives are being met.
China wants to have a greater role to play in the world.
Pakistan wants to equal India in military.


Agreed with the suspicions of each other, but this requires time and patience, hopefully the suspicions would decrease and eventually erased in the near future.

Actions speak louder than words. So if the activities stop then only one can go back on the path of building bridges..


In China we believe India provoked and/or attacked first in the border conflict. However I respect your views from the Indian point of view that China attacked first. I don't want to dwell on the debate who attacked first, but one thing is for sure, the border conflict is unfortunate and both sides should bear responsibility.


Here are the links
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War#Chinese_offensive
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1984/CJB.htm


The most important thing is not to have a second conflict.

agreed.

Pakistan has had four wars with India, this is unfortunate. Hopefully there would not be another.

Likewise.

I think the giving of land to China from Pakistan is not correctly phrased. Kashmir is a disputed territory therefore no one is in a position to give anything. We could only say that it is temporary occupied until a solution has been found.

Well China claims it to be part not of Kashmir but Tibet which is absurd since for the last 200 years it was ruled by an Indian King.

If you look at all the legal documents China was never in contention. Further China by accepting those territories now can never go against Pakistan nor support the Indian govt as regarding the Kashmir issue so China is never invited to talks upon Kashmir usually.

This is a major setback for China's regional power projection and against the India overtures incld that of being one of the first countries to recognise China diplomatically.


It is unfortunate that you phrase it like that. It has a similar meaning but a hostile intent.

if you find it hostile let me rephrase it rival's rival is an ally...


I think rebel groups is a problem for both China and India we would need to cooperate inorder to combat them.

Au contraire it is govt of Chinese elements that are supporting them.


I don't think Tibetans are living in fear, I agree some might not be happy with the government. However, I refer to my point, one cannot hope to satisfy everyone.


Well see I have not been to Tibet neither have you, I'm guessing. But we have a massive Tibetan population in India. I have met quite a few tibetans and they fled their homelands because of persecution mostly.

[Sinosphere]

Of course but I was trying to point even in your company example that decisions are for the benefit of shareholders not company...


I think Company and Shareholders are interlinked. Also, benefiting the company would benefit the shareholders but benefiting shareholders may not necessary benefit the company.

Shareholders play more of an indirect role in the company.

So I think the company is more important than Shareholders, an example, Majority shareholders might be only interested in making money and self interests first rather than placing the interest of the company.

Once there is profit, shareholders might prefer to share the profits and not keep it in the reserves of the company for other projects and expansion purposes.


I mean a common Chinese doesn't have a representative to represent it. For example the Yangtse Dam complex which was built has displaced million and is an ecological disaster and which none of the Chinese have condemned or opposed where as in India something happened at 1/1000 level of that Dam and there were strikes all over.


The common Chinese might not have an official representative but this does not mean their voices are unheard. For each province, city and town there is always a government department which listens to their respective residents.

If the central government has a proposition for a project for a particular city/town. They would contact the local council to carry out a feasibilty study with regards to the public opinion.

Often results might show for and against, but mostly the central government would go with the majority opinion.

Due to this, the minority would be unhappy and protests being carried out and gets picked up by the news, hence news is news. The news would show you this, but they never show the majority who favors the project.

This is the difference between what outsiders see and what local Chinese people like myself sees.

This is what gives news ratings, showing the scenario of the WEAK being oppressed by the STRONG.


Because Indian govt is corrupt,unco-operative, taxes are high, bureaucracy is lazy, Raw materials in India are more expensive than China because of poor policies, labour laws are more strict than China, it takes more time to open a company in India than possibly a few African Nations, Laws regarding FDI are very stringent etc. Govt has not really done much to help the Indian economy.


This is unfortunate, in your opinion, what do you think India should do inorder to erase these unfortunates?


Nope it does not work as well as the Chinese model..


It is unfortunate to hear this, but I hope a more suited model is found for India.


See Tibetans prefer to live a very spartan life and attempts to change them will obviously make them unhappy.


How people choose to live is respected by China, As mentioned, China is not trying to change their lives, we are not banning religious practices. China wants to improve infrastructure and offer better public services. Whether Tibetans want them or not, it is always best to have, but not need, rather than to need, but don't have.


See no problems with hospitals etc. But they follow their on schooling system etc. These things should take time and should be in accordance with what Tibetans want. They are resisting both Sino and Western cultures. They are ethnically,culturally and linguistically distinct from Chinese and see all this as means of forcing of culture..


China respects Tibetan schooling system only on the religious side. New generation Tibetans should have the opportunity to decide and choose which schooling system they prefer.

For example, with China's infrastructure projects in Tibet, China is building westernised standard schools, teaching the modernised way. China is not demanding all should pursue this path, but the option is there for the new generation Tibetans.

China respects the fact that new generation Tibetans have their right to choose their future and not based that if you are a Tibetan, you must pursue the religious road only.


Well come to Dharamshala where the Tibet govt is in exile and ask them for yourseld. I don't think Chinese are allowed to access Tibetan govt's site from China? but you can try googling it.


I haven't been to Dharamashala, but I want to ask, the Tibet government in exile, as a government, what exactly do they do? do they have a say in India political affairs?


See what you are saying I agree on paper but practically things are different.
Most Tibetans see Chinese as conquerors and Chinese govt in Tibet does not have a spectacular record as rulers..


Changes takes time and patience, I agree with that. I don't think most Tibetans see Chinese as conquerors as you have claimed because I don't think you or myself can truely understand what Tibetans think and comment on their behalf.

I am not sure about how the government in Tibet operates therefore, I am not sure about the record as you have claimed.


Tibetans are some of the most advanced herbalists in the world and their system of natural medicine is possibly the most effective.


I agree with that Tibetan herbalism are one of the most advanced in the world, but the methods are suited with the Ancient time. As the world improves and higher expectation in healthcare, modernisation is required.

The westernised standard for healthcare is more practical in terms of curing illnesses.


Philosophically no one can avoid what is in one's fate. Whether they be hospitals or herbs..


Your probably true about one's fate, but with better healthcare practices we could minimise the chances of a fatal fate.


On the contrary Tibetans are a spiritual people they are lifes aims are much different from most people.


It is true Tibetans are spiritual people, China is not forbidding that life, but you must also understand that Tibet now and future would become a fascinating place attracting masses of tourists.

If the tourists are ill or contract a serious disease, would you think the tourists would seek a herbalist doctor or a westernised hospital? I am sure we both know the answer to that.

Again, I want to clarify that China is not changing the lifes of the Tibetans with the modernisation of infrastructure. She is simply trying to offer better standards and choices for the new generation Tibetans and tourists westernised needs.

Hope you understand what I am trying to say, apologies if not.


Well from what I see is that it is a stalemate situation and China being the more magnanimous country in dealings with India will surely act like the "bigger man"


I don't think China could bully India into concession or vice versa. In the modern world, consultations and discussions would eventually bear fruit for both sides. We just need patience and time.


2 nations can never be true friends they can be allies till their objectives are being met.
China wants to have a greater role to play in the world.
Pakistan wants to equal India in military.


To some extent, you could be true about true friends, but I think good relations with other countries especially neighbours are standard policy for any nation.

The result of good friends or good allies as you mentioned is the result of the policy a nation carries out.

It is true China wants a greater role, but I think this is natural for any country who has the confidence and the capabilities.

Pakistan wants to equal India in military, this could be true with the history of the two nations. However, I think the Indo-Pak bilateral relations would improve but requires time and patience from both sides.


Actions speak louder than words. So if the activities stop then only one can go back on the path of building bridges..


I agree, but this requires commitments from both sides. Hope it would work for the better.


Here are the links
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War#Chinese_offensive
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1984/CJB.htm


I have seen the two links.

I think wikipedia does not have the final word for any conflict. I would still stick to my point but at the same time I respect your views to the matter.

Global security link was vague as I don't think a third party would truely understand the truth and situation between two conflicting nations. They could only provide a third party analysis and view, therefore the fact and claims are debatable.


Well China claims it to be part not of Kashmir but Tibet which is absurd since for the last 200 years it was ruled by an Indian King.


I think the Kashmir topic is complicated for China, India and Pakistan. I assume "disputed territory" best decribes it. Which Indian king?

Westerners prefer a Kashmir independence, what's your view on this?


If you look at all the legal documents China was never in contention. Further China by accepting those territories now can never go against Pakistan nor support the Indian govt as regarding the Kashmir issue so China is never invited to talks upon Kashmir usually.


Pakistan transferring territory to China is part of the border treaty in 1963. Both sides agree that it was a mutual beneficial treaty.

I think the transferred territory is part of Pakistan so they have the right to transfer to anyone. For clearer details on this, I think we would need to ask a Pakistani who knows more about the territory being transferred.

I think China believes the Kashmir issue is a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan since the two nations occupy the larger portions. Therefore, China is not invited or wants to participate in the meetings.


This is a major setback for China's regional power projection and against the India overtures incld that of being one of the first countries to recognise China diplomatically.


I don't think it would be a major setback as China and India are working towards better relations. I think the only major concern for India is the closeness between China and Pakistan.


if you find it hostile let me rephrase it rival's rival is an ally...


:)


Au contraire it is govt of Chinese elements that are supporting them.


Rebels are a problem for the two nations. It is not to blame who supports who. The most important thing is that the rebels still exists and we must assist each other in the matter.


Well see I have not been to Tibet neither have you, I'm guessing. But we have a massive Tibetan population in India. I have met quite a few tibetans and they fled their homelands because of persecution mostly.


I can understand your point, but you have only asked the Tibetan side in India, therefore it is one sided.

I have not been to Tibet either, but I can tell you the situation is completely different in tibet itself.

I am a part time trainee nurse working in the local hospital, the hospital regularly sends doctors and nurses to Tibet in assisting local hospitals and most times setting up our own healthcare clinics or outposts.

Due to the fact that I am a trainee I wasn't qualified to go, but the senior nurses and doctors that I have been assisting has told us stories as they returned from their mission.

Our hospital operates independently from the government therefore the government doesn't interfere with our operations. Due to this, the doctors and nurses have heard how the Tibetans felt and stories during their missions. The patients would sometimes talk with nurses while they were recovering in the clinic and they have positive views regarding lifes in Tibet.

We could take their views at face value because the hospital and staff operate independently and therefore are neutral. They wouldn't have the fear of government agents monitoring the tibetan public as mentioned by western media.

[techvipin]

Read this. It touched me too much.
http://indiaedunews.net/In-Focus/August_2007/We_crossed_Himalayas_for_education-_Tibetan_students_1743/

[Vinay]

It is so aimed at the chinese dictators/terrorists/communist party goons.

I dont trust the US motives but i hope responsible democracies will help us see the day when the great chinese people are freed from their terrible fate.