B.RAMAN
I e-mailed the following letter to Ms.Saba Naqvi, Journalist of the "Outlook", on the night of January 21,2011, in response to an E-mailed letter which I had received from her earlier in the evening, which is also reproduced below.Her letter was in response to a letter written by me to the Editor of the "Outlook" drawing his attention to a distortion of my view on some recent alleged incidents of some Hindus taking to anti-Muslim terrorism in an article by her titled "Swami And Friends?" which was carried by the print and online editions of the "Outlook" (http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?270050 ). My original e-mailed letter to the Editor of "Outlook" is available at http://ramanstrategicanalysis.blogspot.com/2011/01/distortion-of-my-views-on-hindu-jihadi.html. I had marked a copy of my letter to Shri Vinod Mehta, Editor of the "Outlook" as well as to Shri Sundeep Dougal, Editor of its online edition. An article titled "Agenda Journalim" written by me after e-mailing my letter to the two Editors is also relevant to this debate. It is available at http://ramanstrategicanalysis.blogspot.com/2011/01/agenda-journalism.html.
2.I am a proud Hindu. At the same time, I have been a strong critic of some aspects of Hinduism and sections of the Hindutva cadre, including the suspected resort to anti-Muslim reprisal terrorism by some members of my community. People who know me well will testify that normally I do not make a prestige issue of small things and am generous in overlooking acts of unkindness by others to me. I did not overlook Ms.Naqvi's action in attributing to me a view which is not mine because I saw it as an attempt by her to use my name in an exercise to project the Hindu community in negative colours. I have a terrible feeling that she rang me up not to get facts or insights, but to use my name in her article in a manner that would project the Hindu community in a bad light.
TEXT OF MY E-MAILED LETTER TO MS.SABA NAQVI ( SENT ON THE NIGHT OF JANUARY 21,2011)
Dear Ms.Saba Naqvi,
I greatly appreciate your kind courtesy in writing to me.
2.I would appreciate it, if my letter to the Editor, Outlook, is published as written by me with whatever comments you may have.As mentioned in my letter, I did not make the statement which you have attributed to me.My attention to the quote attributed by you to me was drawn by some of my senior journalist friends in Delhi, who have known me for many years.They were taken by surprise by the quote since they knew well my views on the subject about which I have been writing and speaking since the first Malegaon blasts of September 2006.They strongly advised that I should draw attention to the incorrectness of the quote and not let it pass.I did so.
2. I was happy to have spoken to you over phone even though I did not know you because I have always had implicit trust in the journalists of the "Outlook". This was my first interaction with you. I would prefer that this remains the last since it has left a bad taste in my mouth.
3. I am taking the liberty of marking a copy of this to Shri Vinod Mehta, Editor, and Shri Sundeep Dougal, the Editor of the Online edition, who had also carried your article. I am proud to have had a long association with the "Outlook" for over a decade. I have been interviewed off and on by its journalists and its online edition has published many of my articles. I have never complained before during the last 10 years or so because I never had this kind of unhappy experience before.
4. I have always held the "Outlook" and its wonderful team of journalists in very great esteem. This unhappy experience with you will not change that esteem.
5.You are welcome to publish this letter to you too in full, if you so wish.If you decide not to do so, so be it.I will not look reduced in the eyes of people who have known me for years.
Warm regards.
B.Raman
TEXT OF THE E-MAILED LETTER RECEIVED EARLIER BY ME FROM MS.NAQVI
Dear Mr Raman
Your letter has been forwarded to me by Mr Vinod Mehta, editor, Outlook. He has requested me to inform you that if you want the letter to be published we shall do so in next week's issue along with a reply from me.
We are also aware that the letter has been circulated on the internet. As this is the first time I am being accused of misquoting someone I have gone through my notes and really do not find any discrepency that should merit this response. Also you suggest that I have passed of your views as my own along with misquoting you. I recall discussing the fact that Indian Mujahideen was blamed for many incidents now being attributed to so called Hindu groups. You mentioned that the group responsible for the Coimbatore blasts appears to have lost its fire-power. Such routine information has been written as facts in the copy as they indeed are.
Although I remain an admirer of your no nonsense views these are hardly original ideas that I would pilfer from someone else.
Please do let me know if you would like your letter to be published.
All the best
Saba Naqvi
Bureau Chief (Delhi)
Outlook
Friday, January 21, 2011
LAL CHOWK FLAG-HOISTING: BJP'S UNWISE POLITICAL OPPORTUNISM
B.RAMAN
It is hoped that good sense will prevail on the leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and they will give up their plans to hold their own flag-hoisting function in the Lal Chowk of Srinagar on the Republic Day on January 26.
2. They, like any other Indian, have a right to hold a flag-hoisting function anywhere in the country where Indian citizens are allowed to hoist the national flag without disturbing public peace. Under certain circumstances, this right, however legitimate, cannot be exercised. For example, when there is a curfew at the place where the flag is proposed to be hoisted.
3.One can understand the BJP's determination to go to Lal Chowk to hoist the flag if the local Government or the Government of India or the nationalist political parties of the State refrain from observing the Republic Day by hoisting the national flag.
4. That is not going to be so. The Governments----the State as well as the Central--- the various national institutions such as the Armed Forces and the central para-military and police forces and the nationalist political parties are going to observe the Republic Day by hoisting the national flag.
5. Only separatist elements, which challenge the unity of India, will not be doing so. The successful holding of the flag-hoisting functions by those mentioned in the previous para would be a fitting reply to the attempt of the separatists to organise a boycott of the Republic Day.
6. Yet one more function by BJP elements from outside the State is not going to add to the sanctity and the nationalist significance of the day. On the contrary, it is going to add to the difficulties of the security forces in maintaining law and order in view of possible attempts by separatist elements to disrupt the BJP's Lal Chowk function. If the BJP wants to help the security forces in maintaining law and order, it should refrain from actions such as holding a function of its own in the Lal Chowk.
7. Moreover, the ground situation in the Valley, which looked so pessimistic till a few months ago due to violence by stone-pelting elements in separatist processions, is showing some positive signs. Such incidents have come down. People are once again going about their normal tasks. There is a greater willingness to join the police instead of boycotting it as was often done in the past.
8. It is not yet normalcy in Srinagar, but a trend towards it. All right-thinking nationalist elements, whether resident in Jammu & Kashmir or outside, have a patriotic responsibility to contribute to a strengthening of this trend in order to convince the separatist elements that the time has come for a re-thinking on their objectives and tactics.
9. The separatists and the instigators of violence from Pakistan will be looking for an opportunity to create a set-back for the nationalist forces in order to revert to the kind of situation that prevailed till some months ago. The security forces are hoping against hope that they will be able to sustain the present trend towards an improvement and that political leaderships will come out with appropriate policies, gestures and actions towards the same end.
10. When almost all other political parties sense the delicate nature of the present situation and are conducting themselves with political maturity and a sense of nationalist responsibility, it is a pity that the BJP alone should conduct itself with unwise political opportunism in utter disregard of the advice and entreaties from others to give up the proposed course of action and should refuse to desist from actions that carry the risk of causing a set-back to the improving trend.
11.It is the bounden duty of all of us outside the State to strengthen the hands of the nationalist elements in the State which have been countering the separatists with great courage. By their unwise obstinacy, the BJP elements could end up be creating a situation that could weaken the hands of the local nationalist elements.
12. It is not the time for the BJP to flaunt its patriotism. All of us are patriots. It is time for it to conduct itself with wisdom and a sense of responsibility. ( 21-1-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail--seventyone2@gmail.com )
It is hoped that good sense will prevail on the leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and they will give up their plans to hold their own flag-hoisting function in the Lal Chowk of Srinagar on the Republic Day on January 26.
2. They, like any other Indian, have a right to hold a flag-hoisting function anywhere in the country where Indian citizens are allowed to hoist the national flag without disturbing public peace. Under certain circumstances, this right, however legitimate, cannot be exercised. For example, when there is a curfew at the place where the flag is proposed to be hoisted.
3.One can understand the BJP's determination to go to Lal Chowk to hoist the flag if the local Government or the Government of India or the nationalist political parties of the State refrain from observing the Republic Day by hoisting the national flag.
4. That is not going to be so. The Governments----the State as well as the Central--- the various national institutions such as the Armed Forces and the central para-military and police forces and the nationalist political parties are going to observe the Republic Day by hoisting the national flag.
5. Only separatist elements, which challenge the unity of India, will not be doing so. The successful holding of the flag-hoisting functions by those mentioned in the previous para would be a fitting reply to the attempt of the separatists to organise a boycott of the Republic Day.
6. Yet one more function by BJP elements from outside the State is not going to add to the sanctity and the nationalist significance of the day. On the contrary, it is going to add to the difficulties of the security forces in maintaining law and order in view of possible attempts by separatist elements to disrupt the BJP's Lal Chowk function. If the BJP wants to help the security forces in maintaining law and order, it should refrain from actions such as holding a function of its own in the Lal Chowk.
7. Moreover, the ground situation in the Valley, which looked so pessimistic till a few months ago due to violence by stone-pelting elements in separatist processions, is showing some positive signs. Such incidents have come down. People are once again going about their normal tasks. There is a greater willingness to join the police instead of boycotting it as was often done in the past.
8. It is not yet normalcy in Srinagar, but a trend towards it. All right-thinking nationalist elements, whether resident in Jammu & Kashmir or outside, have a patriotic responsibility to contribute to a strengthening of this trend in order to convince the separatist elements that the time has come for a re-thinking on their objectives and tactics.
9. The separatists and the instigators of violence from Pakistan will be looking for an opportunity to create a set-back for the nationalist forces in order to revert to the kind of situation that prevailed till some months ago. The security forces are hoping against hope that they will be able to sustain the present trend towards an improvement and that political leaderships will come out with appropriate policies, gestures and actions towards the same end.
10. When almost all other political parties sense the delicate nature of the present situation and are conducting themselves with political maturity and a sense of nationalist responsibility, it is a pity that the BJP alone should conduct itself with unwise political opportunism in utter disregard of the advice and entreaties from others to give up the proposed course of action and should refuse to desist from actions that carry the risk of causing a set-back to the improving trend.
11.It is the bounden duty of all of us outside the State to strengthen the hands of the nationalist elements in the State which have been countering the separatists with great courage. By their unwise obstinacy, the BJP elements could end up be creating a situation that could weaken the hands of the local nationalist elements.
12. It is not the time for the BJP to flaunt its patriotism. All of us are patriots. It is time for it to conduct itself with wisdom and a sense of responsibility. ( 21-1-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail--seventyone2@gmail.com )
Thursday, January 20, 2011
A STEALTH AIRCRAFT WITH PEACEFUL CHINESE CHARACTERISTICS !!
B.RAMAN
Annexed below is an interesting article on the Chinese Stealth aircraft J-20 tested by the Chinese on January 11 before the meeting of Robert Gates, the visiting US Defence Secretary, with President Hu Jintao at Beijing. This article has been written by Rear Admiral Yang Yi, of the People's Liberation Army (Navy) who is a research fellow at the Institute for Strategic Studies, National Defense University of China. This article written by him on January 13 was carried by the party-controlled "People's Daily" online on January 21. (21-1-11)
ANNEXURE
Stealth jet just part of China's peaceful military modernization
The successful test flight of the J-20 stealth fighter in Chengdu is an important achievement for China's national defense industry as well as a landmark in the process of China's military modernization. However, we have no reasons to be complacent and arrogant.
It should be noted a considerable gap still exists between China and the developed Western countries in terms of weaponry. More importantly we should be anticipate and address renewed cries of alarm over the "China threat" that are sure to be raised following the test flight of the J-20.
Special attention should be given to rumors insinuating that the development of the J-20 fighter threatens other countries or will spark an arms race. Ample explanation ought to be made to ensure correct understanding of the fact. Otherwise, it will undermine the external environment for China’s peaceful development, which will be harmful in the long term.
It is the legitimate right of any sovereign country to develop and maintain appropriate military forces for the purpose of safeguarding national security and defending the interests of its national development.
The Chinese government put forward the strategy "make our country prosperous and our armed forces powerful." Being prosperous does not mean dominance, and developing powerful military forces is not equivalent to militarism. The strength of a country's military forces does not constitute a threat necessarily. The things that really matter are a country's strategic intent, the policies it upholds and the way it uses its military forces.
Coping with the "China threat" theory, which is further fueled by China's development of advanced weapons and equipment, requires China’s policymakers to ponder how to assuage the fears of neighboring countries and prevent the United States from being overly sensitive.
To ease the fears of neighboring countries means China will continue to uphold the principle of maintaining harmonious and peaceful relations with neighbors and bring them prosperity. In the 30 years since the Reform and Opening-up, China, has never used its increasing economic strength, political influence and military power to bully those nations that are weaker.
Instead, at critical times, such as the Southeast Asian financial crisis of 1997, it sacrificed local interests to help the neighboring countries through the difficult times. In the future, China will definitely not seek hegemony in the region by its military strength.
To keep the United States from being overly sensitive is not so easy. As the superior military power, the United States keeps a high degree of vigilance regarding the development of other countries’ militaries. One current trend worthy of attention is that the United States is increasingly focusing its strategic attention on China. Inappropriately handled, the Sino-U.S. military and security relations will fall into a "security dilemma."
By adhering to peaceful development and pursuing a defensive national military policy, China does not pose a threat to any country. With the development of new technology and in accordance with the needs of national defense, upgrades to weapons and the replacement of equipment is standard practice in the world. China's weapons and equipment development is entirely based on its own security and defense needs, which serves to the need of defend national sovereignty, security and territorial integrity, instead of targeting any country.
China will never seek hegemony or engage in military expansion, nor will it compete with any country in arms race. In particular, China will not have a "Tortoise and the Hare"-style arms race with the United States.
(The author Yang Yi is a rear admiral of the PLA Navy and research fellow at the Institute for Strategic Studies, National Defense University. The article is translated by People's Daily Online)
Annexed below is an interesting article on the Chinese Stealth aircraft J-20 tested by the Chinese on January 11 before the meeting of Robert Gates, the visiting US Defence Secretary, with President Hu Jintao at Beijing. This article has been written by Rear Admiral Yang Yi, of the People's Liberation Army (Navy) who is a research fellow at the Institute for Strategic Studies, National Defense University of China. This article written by him on January 13 was carried by the party-controlled "People's Daily" online on January 21. (21-1-11)
ANNEXURE
Stealth jet just part of China's peaceful military modernization
The successful test flight of the J-20 stealth fighter in Chengdu is an important achievement for China's national defense industry as well as a landmark in the process of China's military modernization. However, we have no reasons to be complacent and arrogant.
It should be noted a considerable gap still exists between China and the developed Western countries in terms of weaponry. More importantly we should be anticipate and address renewed cries of alarm over the "China threat" that are sure to be raised following the test flight of the J-20.
Special attention should be given to rumors insinuating that the development of the J-20 fighter threatens other countries or will spark an arms race. Ample explanation ought to be made to ensure correct understanding of the fact. Otherwise, it will undermine the external environment for China’s peaceful development, which will be harmful in the long term.
It is the legitimate right of any sovereign country to develop and maintain appropriate military forces for the purpose of safeguarding national security and defending the interests of its national development.
The Chinese government put forward the strategy "make our country prosperous and our armed forces powerful." Being prosperous does not mean dominance, and developing powerful military forces is not equivalent to militarism. The strength of a country's military forces does not constitute a threat necessarily. The things that really matter are a country's strategic intent, the policies it upholds and the way it uses its military forces.
Coping with the "China threat" theory, which is further fueled by China's development of advanced weapons and equipment, requires China’s policymakers to ponder how to assuage the fears of neighboring countries and prevent the United States from being overly sensitive.
To ease the fears of neighboring countries means China will continue to uphold the principle of maintaining harmonious and peaceful relations with neighbors and bring them prosperity. In the 30 years since the Reform and Opening-up, China, has never used its increasing economic strength, political influence and military power to bully those nations that are weaker.
Instead, at critical times, such as the Southeast Asian financial crisis of 1997, it sacrificed local interests to help the neighboring countries through the difficult times. In the future, China will definitely not seek hegemony in the region by its military strength.
To keep the United States from being overly sensitive is not so easy. As the superior military power, the United States keeps a high degree of vigilance regarding the development of other countries’ militaries. One current trend worthy of attention is that the United States is increasingly focusing its strategic attention on China. Inappropriately handled, the Sino-U.S. military and security relations will fall into a "security dilemma."
By adhering to peaceful development and pursuing a defensive national military policy, China does not pose a threat to any country. With the development of new technology and in accordance with the needs of national defense, upgrades to weapons and the replacement of equipment is standard practice in the world. China's weapons and equipment development is entirely based on its own security and defense needs, which serves to the need of defend national sovereignty, security and territorial integrity, instead of targeting any country.
China will never seek hegemony or engage in military expansion, nor will it compete with any country in arms race. In particular, China will not have a "Tortoise and the Hare"-style arms race with the United States.
(The author Yang Yi is a rear admiral of the PLA Navy and research fellow at the Institute for Strategic Studies, National Defense University. The article is translated by People's Daily Online)
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
MY ONE-SENTENCE ASSESSMENT ON DR.MANMOHAN SINGH'S CABINET RESHUFFLE OF JANUARY 19
B.RAMAN
Fiddling with portfolios while India is burning. (20-1-11)
Fiddling with portfolios while India is burning. (20-1-11)
CHINESE CARROTS FOR OBAMA, US STICKS FOR HU
B.RAMAN
( Collated from news agency reports )
CHINESE CARROTS FOR OBAMA ( From Chinese media)
The apparent highlight was the announcement of a raft of successful trade deals worth billions of dollars.
"We will be announcing that $45 billion of US export deals have been concluded, supporting 235,000 US jobs," AFP quoted a senior US official as saying, adding that the total includes a massive $19 billion contract for 200 Boeing aircraft.
According to the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), US and Chinese energy companies announced a variety of partnerships at a conference organized by the Brookings Institution, a Washington think-tank.
Alcoa and China Power Investment Corp said they would collaborate on a broad range of aluminum and energy projects, both inside and outside China, totaling $7.5 billion in investments, the newspaper reported.
Klaus Kleinfeld, Alcoa's CEO, told the WSJ that the Hu-Obama summit had brought the deal home.
"Had the date not been set for the state visit, (the agreement) wouldn't have happened in a speedy fashion," Kleinfeld said.
General Electric (GE) Energy announced a joint venture with Shenhua Group Corp to sell clean-coal technologies.
The two countries will also begin preparing for a jointly financed nuclear security center in China that aims to improve training and security at nuclear sites and to help keep better track of nuclear materials, Reuters reported.
US STICKS FOR HU JINTAO ( From Western agency reports that were not carried by Chinese media)
Hundreds of Chinese and Tibetan protesters loudly demonstrated outside the White House as Hu began his state visit to the US.
The protesters held up banners urging Obama to "admonish Hu" over human rights abuses and the conflict over Tibet.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who shared a private meal with Hu and Obama on Tuesday (January 17) night, said on Wednesday that it was so far unclear whether China was a US friend or foe. "The reason we're rolling out the red carpet" for the Chinese leader "is we think we'll be better (able) to answer such a question as we move forward," Clinton told ABC television when asked whether China is a friend or foe. "My hope is we have a normal relationship," she said.
At a frank press conference, there were few concrete signs the leaders had narrowed gaps on currency, access to markets or strategic issues, despite an earlier announcement of tens of billions of dollars in US export deals. Both sides promised to seek further cooperation on the world's most pressing issues despite their differences, and Obama welcomed China's rise as a key power and looked forward to an era of "friendly competition." The President also candidly laid out US differences with China, demanding a level playing field for US firms, said the yuan currency was "undervalued" and encouraged dialogue with the Dalai Lama's representatives over Tibet. Obama, under pressure because his successor as Nobel peace laureate Liu Xiaobo is in a Chinese jail, acknowledged that China had a different political system than America, but said he would not shirk from raising rights issues. "We have some core views as Americans about the universality of certain rights - freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly - that we think are very important and that transcend cultures," he said.
"I have been very candid with President Hu about these issues."
In a sign of the political sensitivity of Hu's visit, top members of Congress, including John Boehner, the speaker of the House of Representatives, declined invitations to attend the State dinner for Hu.Democratic US Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid branded Hu a "dictator" then withdrew the remark. (20-1-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate, Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
( Collated from news agency reports )
CHINESE CARROTS FOR OBAMA ( From Chinese media)
The apparent highlight was the announcement of a raft of successful trade deals worth billions of dollars.
"We will be announcing that $45 billion of US export deals have been concluded, supporting 235,000 US jobs," AFP quoted a senior US official as saying, adding that the total includes a massive $19 billion contract for 200 Boeing aircraft.
According to the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), US and Chinese energy companies announced a variety of partnerships at a conference organized by the Brookings Institution, a Washington think-tank.
Alcoa and China Power Investment Corp said they would collaborate on a broad range of aluminum and energy projects, both inside and outside China, totaling $7.5 billion in investments, the newspaper reported.
Klaus Kleinfeld, Alcoa's CEO, told the WSJ that the Hu-Obama summit had brought the deal home.
"Had the date not been set for the state visit, (the agreement) wouldn't have happened in a speedy fashion," Kleinfeld said.
General Electric (GE) Energy announced a joint venture with Shenhua Group Corp to sell clean-coal technologies.
The two countries will also begin preparing for a jointly financed nuclear security center in China that aims to improve training and security at nuclear sites and to help keep better track of nuclear materials, Reuters reported.
US STICKS FOR HU JINTAO ( From Western agency reports that were not carried by Chinese media)
Hundreds of Chinese and Tibetan protesters loudly demonstrated outside the White House as Hu began his state visit to the US.
The protesters held up banners urging Obama to "admonish Hu" over human rights abuses and the conflict over Tibet.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who shared a private meal with Hu and Obama on Tuesday (January 17) night, said on Wednesday that it was so far unclear whether China was a US friend or foe. "The reason we're rolling out the red carpet" for the Chinese leader "is we think we'll be better (able) to answer such a question as we move forward," Clinton told ABC television when asked whether China is a friend or foe. "My hope is we have a normal relationship," she said.
At a frank press conference, there were few concrete signs the leaders had narrowed gaps on currency, access to markets or strategic issues, despite an earlier announcement of tens of billions of dollars in US export deals. Both sides promised to seek further cooperation on the world's most pressing issues despite their differences, and Obama welcomed China's rise as a key power and looked forward to an era of "friendly competition." The President also candidly laid out US differences with China, demanding a level playing field for US firms, said the yuan currency was "undervalued" and encouraged dialogue with the Dalai Lama's representatives over Tibet. Obama, under pressure because his successor as Nobel peace laureate Liu Xiaobo is in a Chinese jail, acknowledged that China had a different political system than America, but said he would not shirk from raising rights issues. "We have some core views as Americans about the universality of certain rights - freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly - that we think are very important and that transcend cultures," he said.
"I have been very candid with President Hu about these issues."
In a sign of the political sensitivity of Hu's visit, top members of Congress, including John Boehner, the speaker of the House of Representatives, declined invitations to attend the State dinner for Hu.Democratic US Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid branded Hu a "dictator" then withdrew the remark. (20-1-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate, Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
CANCER AS FUN
People keep complimenting me for valiantly fighting my cancer.Am not. Am merrily getting along with it.
B.Raman
B.Raman
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
US & CHINA: FRIENDS OR FOES?
B.RAMAN
China has emerged as a leading economic power next only in importance to the US. It is seeking to achieve a military capability commensurate with its economic strength, but its military capability cannot equal that of the US for many years to come. The US has no reason to fear China's growing military strength. Both can have their space in the Pacific without threatening each other. Hopes of a greater sense of realism and a greater comfort level between the two countries after Barack Obama assumed office in January 2009 have been belied. The expectations created after Obama's visit to China in November 2009 have remained unfulfilled. The time has come for mid-course corrections in their policies towards each other by the two countries. President Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao should address this question during their talks in Washington DC.
2. These are broadly the themes voiced by governmental and non-governmental personalities in China as Hu started his current bilateral visit to the US on January 18---- his second since he took over as the Chinese President. The first was in April 2006, when George Bush was the US President.
3.The disquiet in the Chinese mind over the way the relations have evolved under Obama is evident from an editorial titled " Sino-US relationship must be better defined" carried by the Communist Party-controlled "Global Times" on January 18, the day Hu arrived in Washington to be welcomed at the Andrews Air Force base by Vice-President Joe Biden. His only engagement on the day of his arrival was a private dinner with Obama. The State visit starts on January 19.
4. The "Global Times" wrote : "As the two most powerful countries in the world, China and the US should clarify their relationship, and lay speculations to rest. It is not easy to give this bilateral relationship a clear definition, but perhaps they can start from what it is not. The US has been running the table on how to position Sino-US relations. Former President Bill Clinton declared it a constructive strategic partnership. But it has retreated from those heady days. The word "partnership" is still mentioned, but no longer recorded in official documents, replaced by terms such as "constructive cooperation" or "stakeholders." It shows the US' misgivings in taking China as a friend. But is China a foe of the US? US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates openly stated that China is not a potential enemy of the US. Attempts to drive a wedge between the two countries have not gained traction in the US and the West. President Hu's visit will be placed under a global microscope. It is good timing for Washington to declare that China and the US are not enemies today, and will not be in the future. This clarification will remove many uncertainties that may jeopardize global stability."
5. As Hu arrived, comments from US officials would not have been very encouraging for the Chinese. The emphasis was not on a strategic partnership, but on achieving a "workable" relationship.A curtain-raiser commentary on the visit by the Agence France Presse (AFP) said:"The White House has minutely planned the visit, with top members of Obama's national security team, frankly laying out areas of disagreement - though also stressing the vital nature of workable relations to America's future. Washington has also made clear it wants to talk to China about moderating its ally North Korea's belligerence, and officials said they believe their pressure on Beijing on the issue might be beginning to show results. On Tuesday, the White House was forced to defend the decision to offer a state visit to Hu, despite the fact that the two sides appear to be as far apart as ever on crucial human rights questions. "We will continue to have difficult conversations, but necessary conversations that have to be had with China and we'll do that again tomorrow," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters. "In order to make progress on certain issues you've seen the two countries work together, despite, again, continuing to have differences on things like continued economic growth and human rights."
6. The remarks of Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, on the relations between China and the US made last week would not have been music to the ears of the Chinese. She was quoted as saying: "This is not a relationship that fits neatly into the black and white categories like friend or rival.We are two complex nations with very different histories, with profoundly difficult political systems and outlooks."
7. The call for a re-definition of the relationship to restore its importance in the US foreign policy making has come not only from Chinese analysts and sections of the Chinese media such as the "Global Times". It has also come from former US policy-makers such as Zbigniew Brzezinski , former National Security Adviser, and Henry Kissinger, former National Security Adviser and Secretary of State. The Chinese have been highlighting with considerable nostalgie that Hu's visit coincides with the 40 th anniversary of the first secret visit of Kissinger to China in July 1971, which set the ball rolling for a rappochement between the US and China which benefitted the US greatly in its cold war with the USSR.
8. The Chinese have also been recalling wistfully a reported remark of Kissinger during one of his visits to China that all US Presidents understand the importance of China, but do not have a proper understanding of China when they come to office.
9. The Chinese are hoping that the definite downward slide in the US-China relations during 2010 was only due to the inadequate understanding of China by Obama and that as result of the current talks with Hu, inadequacies in understanding will be removed and 2011 will see a turn for the better in the bilateral relations.
10. Beijing does not seem to understand that whatever be the warm words used by Obama and others during his visit to Washington, the question mark over China has become even bigger in the eyes of the Americans due to their assertiveness in the South and East China Seas, their unwillingness to pressure North Korea to behave, their accelerated military-build-up and the growing signs of the increasing role of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) in external policy making---particularly with regard to relations with the US.
11. The Chinese action in holding the first test flight of their stealth aircraft when Robert Gates, the US Defence Secretary, was on a visit to Beijing from January 9 to 12 to improve military-military relations has added to the concerns of the US regarding China's real military intentions. It has been seen as a blatant Chinese attempt to flaunt their growing military might when Gates was in Beijing.
12. This was an extremely insensitive action on their part which has made the Americans ask themselves even more intensely than in the past: Is China a friend or foe?
13. Hu wants to reassure the Americans that whatever it might or might not do, China is a friend of the US. Will he be able to carry conviction? (19-1-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
China has emerged as a leading economic power next only in importance to the US. It is seeking to achieve a military capability commensurate with its economic strength, but its military capability cannot equal that of the US for many years to come. The US has no reason to fear China's growing military strength. Both can have their space in the Pacific without threatening each other. Hopes of a greater sense of realism and a greater comfort level between the two countries after Barack Obama assumed office in January 2009 have been belied. The expectations created after Obama's visit to China in November 2009 have remained unfulfilled. The time has come for mid-course corrections in their policies towards each other by the two countries. President Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao should address this question during their talks in Washington DC.
2. These are broadly the themes voiced by governmental and non-governmental personalities in China as Hu started his current bilateral visit to the US on January 18---- his second since he took over as the Chinese President. The first was in April 2006, when George Bush was the US President.
3.The disquiet in the Chinese mind over the way the relations have evolved under Obama is evident from an editorial titled " Sino-US relationship must be better defined" carried by the Communist Party-controlled "Global Times" on January 18, the day Hu arrived in Washington to be welcomed at the Andrews Air Force base by Vice-President Joe Biden. His only engagement on the day of his arrival was a private dinner with Obama. The State visit starts on January 19.
4. The "Global Times" wrote : "As the two most powerful countries in the world, China and the US should clarify their relationship, and lay speculations to rest. It is not easy to give this bilateral relationship a clear definition, but perhaps they can start from what it is not. The US has been running the table on how to position Sino-US relations. Former President Bill Clinton declared it a constructive strategic partnership. But it has retreated from those heady days. The word "partnership" is still mentioned, but no longer recorded in official documents, replaced by terms such as "constructive cooperation" or "stakeholders." It shows the US' misgivings in taking China as a friend. But is China a foe of the US? US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates openly stated that China is not a potential enemy of the US. Attempts to drive a wedge between the two countries have not gained traction in the US and the West. President Hu's visit will be placed under a global microscope. It is good timing for Washington to declare that China and the US are not enemies today, and will not be in the future. This clarification will remove many uncertainties that may jeopardize global stability."
5. As Hu arrived, comments from US officials would not have been very encouraging for the Chinese. The emphasis was not on a strategic partnership, but on achieving a "workable" relationship.A curtain-raiser commentary on the visit by the Agence France Presse (AFP) said:"The White House has minutely planned the visit, with top members of Obama's national security team, frankly laying out areas of disagreement - though also stressing the vital nature of workable relations to America's future. Washington has also made clear it wants to talk to China about moderating its ally North Korea's belligerence, and officials said they believe their pressure on Beijing on the issue might be beginning to show results. On Tuesday, the White House was forced to defend the decision to offer a state visit to Hu, despite the fact that the two sides appear to be as far apart as ever on crucial human rights questions. "We will continue to have difficult conversations, but necessary conversations that have to be had with China and we'll do that again tomorrow," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters. "In order to make progress on certain issues you've seen the two countries work together, despite, again, continuing to have differences on things like continued economic growth and human rights."
6. The remarks of Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, on the relations between China and the US made last week would not have been music to the ears of the Chinese. She was quoted as saying: "This is not a relationship that fits neatly into the black and white categories like friend or rival.We are two complex nations with very different histories, with profoundly difficult political systems and outlooks."
7. The call for a re-definition of the relationship to restore its importance in the US foreign policy making has come not only from Chinese analysts and sections of the Chinese media such as the "Global Times". It has also come from former US policy-makers such as Zbigniew Brzezinski , former National Security Adviser, and Henry Kissinger, former National Security Adviser and Secretary of State. The Chinese have been highlighting with considerable nostalgie that Hu's visit coincides with the 40 th anniversary of the first secret visit of Kissinger to China in July 1971, which set the ball rolling for a rappochement between the US and China which benefitted the US greatly in its cold war with the USSR.
8. The Chinese have also been recalling wistfully a reported remark of Kissinger during one of his visits to China that all US Presidents understand the importance of China, but do not have a proper understanding of China when they come to office.
9. The Chinese are hoping that the definite downward slide in the US-China relations during 2010 was only due to the inadequate understanding of China by Obama and that as result of the current talks with Hu, inadequacies in understanding will be removed and 2011 will see a turn for the better in the bilateral relations.
10. Beijing does not seem to understand that whatever be the warm words used by Obama and others during his visit to Washington, the question mark over China has become even bigger in the eyes of the Americans due to their assertiveness in the South and East China Seas, their unwillingness to pressure North Korea to behave, their accelerated military-build-up and the growing signs of the increasing role of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) in external policy making---particularly with regard to relations with the US.
11. The Chinese action in holding the first test flight of their stealth aircraft when Robert Gates, the US Defence Secretary, was on a visit to Beijing from January 9 to 12 to improve military-military relations has added to the concerns of the US regarding China's real military intentions. It has been seen as a blatant Chinese attempt to flaunt their growing military might when Gates was in Beijing.
12. This was an extremely insensitive action on their part which has made the Americans ask themselves even more intensely than in the past: Is China a friend or foe?
13. Hu wants to reassure the Americans that whatever it might or might not do, China is a friend of the US. Will he be able to carry conviction? (19-1-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)