The "friendless" syndrome

[ChineseTiger1986]

But again that is not due to those countries. It is a very deep anxiety in Indian foreign policy circles, about China. Also, you must have seen that the recent government elections in SriLanka came in our favor, with the government head explicitly saying that India should not be infuriated. So yes, the countries like SriLanka and Bangla were playing, what we call the "China Card", but it is nowhere near you.

See fundamentally, the issue is the same that regional small players are anxious about intentions of the regional hegemon and rising power, but in China's case these are way too severe. Why? I think because:
1. China is bigger and growing faster
2. China is more aggressive and assertive
3. China has fundamental disputes with more countries, usually on territory and historical narrative. India fundamentally has disputes only with Pakistan.
4. US is needling countries in Chinese rim

PS- On a side note can you please reply to the thing I asked earlier. I quote it again here:
"I posted a thread in China and Far East and it is telling me that it is asking moderator approval. I have seen this for the first time, and don't know what to do. Its already been hours and there seems to be no progress. I am new here, what should be done?"

China is more aggressive?

India is still hosting the Tibetan separatists, while we didn't host yours.

In fact, we were still too nice with you guys, so it might give you guys an impression that we are way too docile, so it is ok to keep messing with us by supporting those Tibetan separatists.

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

China is more aggressive?

India is still hosting the Tibetan separatists, while we didn't host yours.

In fact, we were still too nice with you guys, so it might give you guys an impression that we are way too docile, so it is ok to keep messing with us by supporting those Tibetan separatists.

Listen, I know your views and perspectives. Being an Indian I also know my government and people's views and perspectives. The reality is a bit obscure. I would say take China's 60% and India's 40% and you will get a reasonable idea. The whole problem of Tibet started because of fundamental differences of personalities. We both wanted to be friends, but were very different and couldn't understand each other. We came through a very peaceful non violent struggle, and adopted a negotiatory approach and adopted democracy. Your government came about as the result of years of fighting and struggle and civil war, which divided your country. But we both have big egos and nobody wants to listen to each other. There lies the problem.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Listen, I know your views and perspectives. Being an Indian I also know my government and people's views and perspectives. The reality is a bit obscure. I would say take China's 60% and India's 40% and you will get a reasonable idea. The whole problem of Tibet started because of fundamental differences of personalities. We both wanted to be friends, but were very different and couldn't understand each other. We came through a very peaceful non violent struggle, and adopted a negotiatory approach and adopted democracy. Your government came about as the result of years of fighting and struggle and civil war, which divided your country. But we both have big egos and nobody wants to listen to each other. There lies the problem.

Tibet was part of China for at least several hundred years, and it had never been part of India.

Tibet is none of your business, just keep your hands from it.

 

[RescueRanger]

the figures :

US has oversea bases everywhere, and China has none.

^ BTW These are allies, partners and trade partners I know that China has in the world. CHINA is NOT alone. If any knowledgeable Chinese member wishes to add/edit this please do so.

The Chinese technology companies poised to dominate the world | World news | The Guardian

Footprint of the Chinese National Logging Corporation:

 

[Aepsilons]

View attachment 187283

662 bases in 38 countries, to be exact.

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

Tibet was part of China for at least several hundred years, and it had never been part of India.

Tibet is none of your business, just keep your hands from it.

I know that but people in India feel that Tibet is somehow closer to them. Not only this the tibetan refugees also say this here, which creates this impression. These are facts. I know it is not fair, but you must balance this perspective. Actively engage propaganda with propaganda. Ever try coming on twitter, and you will see all loads of shit thrown about you, you need to counter that effectively.

 

[TaiShang]

The Indian on this thread and on this forum desires to create flame wars; that is why he puts "internal problems" and "Taiwan" in everything related or unrelated to the topic at hand.

He even wonders about Taiwan's separatism on a thread about China's HSR.

The most effective way to kill a troll (especially an Indian troll known for his cheap Indian tactics from the very start) is stop feeding it.

Report the Indian and stop feeding it, for God's sake.

On topic: China's foreign policy doctrine is based on strict non-interference and protection of national sovereignty. Alliance system, on the other hand, requires a certain degree of interference and breach of sovereignty. Therefore, China won't be involved in an aggressive alliance-making scheme. China is friendless in that regard because China does not hold the leverage to send a drone and kill people on other peoples' land or operate secret prisons hidden from the general public in foreign lands.

China may buy such alliance. US buys Poland and operates a secret prison there. I wonder where, but, if paid enough, I guess you can find a willing government to lease a secret location to do stuff. But it is against China's foreign policy doctrine.

But one can also hardly deny the fact that China also leads a number of international (often of economic nature) frameworks; probably has been even more active in that sense than the United States over the past few years. How does that correlate with the notion of being "friendless"?

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

The Indian on this thread and on this forum is here to create flame wars; that is why he puts "internal problems" and "Taiwan" in everything related or unrelated to the topic at hand.

He even wonders about Taiwan's separatism on a thread about China's HSR.

The most effective way to kill a troll (especially an Indian troll known for his cheap Indian tactics from the very start) is stop feeding it.

Report the Indian and stop feeding it, for God's sake.

On topic: China's foreign policy doctrine is based on strict non-interference and protection of national sovereignty. Alliance system, on the other hand, requires a certain degree of interference and breach of sovereignty. Therefore, China won't be involved in an aggressive alliance-making scheme. China is friendless in that regard because China does not hold the leverage to send a drone and kill people on other peoples' land or operate secret prisons hidden from the general public in foreign lands.

China may buy such alliance. US buys Poland and operates a secret prison there. I wonder where, but, if paid enough, I guess you can find a willing government to lease a secret location to do stuff. But it is against China's foreign policy doctrine.

But one can also hardly deny the fact that China also leads a number of international (often of economic nature) frameworks; probably has been even more active in that sense than the United States over the past few years. How does that correlate with the notion of being "friendless"?

I don't know what I have done that has infuriated you to this extent. Taiwan is the top most foreign and military policy concern of China for a long time, and in any analysis Taiwan will inadvertently come up. Also, I am sorry I deviated in that thread, but as far as I remember, a Taiwanese guy mentioned something, and I started to talk to him. I am totally in favor of China on the Taiwan issue. Perhaps I should have messaged him privately. I would remember that. I hope you can understand.

Also, my analysis of friends and foes were not only about sovereign countries, but also included institutions, extra-state actors etc. I am sure you think that as concern also. I listed India's own internal problems as its foes.

 

[TaiShang]

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

I know that but people in India feel that Tibet is somehow closer to them. Not only this the tibetan refugees also say this here, which creates this impression. These are facts. I know it is not fair, but you must balance this perspective. Actively engage propaganda with propaganda. Ever try coming on twitter, and you will see all loads of shit thrown about you, you need to counter that effectively.

Tibetans are the genetic cousins of Hans, while their religion is also Buddhism, not Hinduism.

Except the cult followers of Dalai Lama, no normal Tibetans would feel closer to Indians than to Hans.

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

Tibetans are the genetic cousins of Hans, while their religion is also Buddhism, not Hinduism.

Except the cult followers of Dalai Lama, no normal Tibetans would feel closer to Indians than to Hans.

Yes, counter that. You people don't counter propaganda, and other parties go away saying anything.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Yes, counter that. You people don't counter propaganda, and other parties go away saying anything.

Most Chinese now are getting more and more immune against those foreign propaganda.

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

Most Chinese now are getting more and more immune against those foreign propaganda.

It is not only Chinese that it is against, it is also to influence everyone else. In this globalized world, public opinion matters a lot. Of the Global audience. In democratic set-ups where people are elected based on public perception, the politicians and the system becomes very good at managing public opinion, perceptions and image, and even manipulating it. Hence, they become very good at propaganda, soft-power, and constructing identities. This is one fault with the Chinese system.

 

[TaiShang]

Most Chinese now are getting more and more immune against those foreign propaganda.

Yes, LOL. Do not even feel the urge to counter propaganda and bring up one out of many ills of the Indian regime.

Indian soft power indeed.

The best way is to stop feeding the troll and report the activity.

 

[cirr]

I personally think China has way too many enemies.

The article tries to imply that since Japanese people are not electing Abe to start a war with China, they are hence not enemies, redefines the word, at least the way I understand it. If this is the case, there will really be no enemies in the world, because it will be a very off chance that anyone will elect a leader for the sole purpose of waging war, or explicit aggression and provocation of other side. The world is really complex, and generally everyone thinks that he or she wants to live in peace.

I would define enemies as countries or institutions that are pleading for your fall openly. Who have a very negative opinion of you, and have a major preoccupation to hurt or act against your interests. Obviously there can be many levels of such hatred.

In my view following are the countries and institutions, that are currently, in the near term your enemies or foes whatever you would like to call them. Please be aware these are the foes in the near term (~5 years) and these are based on present geopolitical realities and the policies of major governments. These could very well change over time.

1. Japan

2. Vietnam

3. Philippines

4. India

5. United States, and the inseparable coalition of anglophone countries including Australia

6. Global civil society

7. Taiwan

8. Internal Problems -

1. Hong Kong
2. Tibet
3. Xinjiang
4. Internal CIvil Society

9. Global Public Opinion normalized with GDP/capita

10. Sentiments against Chinese investment- which is flamed by western media propaganda

11. Muslim sympathy for Uyghurs


Remember again that these are current trends, which totally depend on the current policies. Mongolia has deep distrust and latent aggression towards China, it is always wary of China, for example.

If you look at it, not many countries have similarly fraught relations.

On a side note, I posted a thread in China and Far East and it is telling me that it is asking moderator approval. I have seen this for the first time, and don't know what to do. Its already been hours and there seems to be no progress. I am new here, what should be done?

So you think Japan is closer to India than it is to China？

So you think Vietnam is closer to India than it is to China？

Ditto the rest。

You need to have your head checked if you truly think thus。

As for internal problems，there are literally thousands of armed groups operating in India that want to see the country dismembered。

Our so-called Tibet and Xinjiang problems are minute compared with what India has（up to its neck really - not a single day goes by without the members of the security forces getting killed by militants）