What's new

'China ready to go to war to safeguard national interests'

What country isn't willing to go to war for national interest? Stupid title.

Meant to project a general air of aggressiveness about China. Goes in line when the Indian narrative of being victims of "assertiveness". Which interestingly is a common euphemism in India media for aggression. They can't point to enough facts to justify the use of "aggression" so this word is a stand in

This is the impression I got from watching Indian news report WRT China.
 
Meant to project a general air of aggressiveness about China. Goes in line when the Indian narrative of being victims of "assertiveness". Which interestingly is a common euphemism in India media for aggression. They can't point to enough facts to justify the use of "aggression" so this word is a stand in

This is the impression I got from watching Indian news report WRT China.

I think that this will turn out to be a self-fulfilling prophecy for them.
 
The first article was published in a Chinese journal. Indian Express only translated and quoted from the article written by a Chinese author. The second is from Wall Street Journal and about China outspending everyone in Asia on Offensive weapons and how that is impacting on everyone from Japan, Australia, S. Korea, Indonesia and of course India.

The main theme of the article by the Chinese author is anti-US and US influence in Asia. If only people actually read the article before commenting
 
The first article was published in a Chinese journal. Indian Express only translated and quoted from the article written by a Chinese author. The second is from Wall Street Journal and about China outspending everyone in Asia on Offensive weapons and how that is impacting on everyone from Japan, Australia, S. Korea, Indonesia and of course India.

The main theme of the article by the Chinese author is anti-US and US influence in Asia. If only people actually read the article before commenting

Why bother reading it again when it was posted and discussed.
 
^^^I was only responding to posts mentioning some sort of Indian paranoia when the article itself was published in a Chinese journal.
 
Meant to project a general air of aggressiveness about China. Goes in line when the Indian narrative of being victims of "assertiveness". Which interestingly is a common euphemism in India media for aggression. They can't point to enough facts to justify the use of "aggression" so this word is a stand in

This is the impression I got from watching Indian news report WRT China.

Putting up bogeymen to unite a fragmented democracy is a well established American political tradition, and an Indian one as well. The problem with democracy is that power and interests are decentralized. That centripetal force constantly threatens to tear the country apart. To prevent disunity, and to centralize the purpose of a nation, a democracy always needs an enemy. For the United States, it was the Germans in WWI, then the Japanese in WWII, then the Soviet Union in the late 20th century. When the Soviet Union collapsed, American commentators widely moaned the loss of a convenient enemy. The American public resumed their instinct for isolationism and the growth of the American Empire slowed. 9/11 was greeted with joy by the Bush administration as it created a new enemy--Osama bin Laden and Islamic terrorism--to unify the country, as well as the excuse to expand the American Empire in the Middle East.

What about India? Indian politicians use the same political tricks to hold together an even more fragmented population, ethnically and religiously. The Indian regime's quiet effort to annex Chinese territory backfired and resulted in the war of '62. Yet the Indians perpetuate the victim myth and refuse to acknowledge their own culpability in the war. Indian greed for Chinese territory prompted the government to strengthen relations with Pakistan. India harbors Tibetan separatists and have a history of arming Tibetan terrorists. The Indian media's favorite pastime is China-bashing and Indian commentators write most of the anti-Chinese propaganda in the English language media.

China has no malign interest in India, yet by insisting on treating China as the enemy, Indians have given birth to a self-fulfilling prophecy. That is the weakness of Indian democracy.
 
Putting up bogeymen to unite a fragmented democracy is a well established American political tradition, and an Indian one as well. The problem with democracy is that power and interests are decentralized. That centripetal force constantly threatens to tear the country apart. To prevent disunity, and to centralize the purpose of a nation, a democracy always needs an enemy. For the United States, it was the Germans in WWI, then the Japanese in WWII, then the Soviet Union in the late 20th century. When the Soviet Union collapsed, American commentators widely moaned the loss of a convenient enemy. The American public resumed their instinct for isolationism and the growth of the American Empire slowed. 9/11 was greeted with joy by Bush administration as it created a new enemy--Osama bin Laden and Islamic terrorism--to unify the country, as well as an excuse to expand the American Empire in the Middle East.

What about India? Indian politicians use the same political tricks to hold together an even more fragmented population, ethnically and religiously. The Indian regime's quiet effort to annex Chinese territory backfired and resulted in the war of '62. Yet the Indians perpetuate the victim myth and refuse to acknowledge their own culpability in the war. Indian greed for Chinese territory prompted the government to strenghthen relations with Pakistan. India harbors Tibetan separatists and have a history of arming Tibetan terrorists. Indian media's favorite pastime is China-bashing and Indian commentators write most of the anti-Chinese propaganda in the English language media.

China has no malign interest in India, yet by insisting on treating China as the enemy, Indians have given birth to a self-fulfilling prophecy. That is the weakness of Indian democracy.

Well said and that's why I think a policy of sending mixed signals will keep the Indian leadership off balance and keep the population divided over China. On one hand we should continue friendly cultural exchanges, and building relationship with the business community, on the other we encourage the Indian media to play up the Chinese threat and an aura of power and invincibility.

So far it really seems the India leadership are a little confused about what they should do WRT China.
Beijing, Delhi downplay Manmohan’s China remark about Chinese assertiveness
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom