Military Review

China and India: friendship forever?

5 May India and China withdrew their troops from the disputed territory in the Himalayas. The decision on the withdrawal of troops was made at a meeting of the commanders of the border detachments, said "" with reference to the Reuters agency. The conclusion was made at the same time: the Indian military personnel moved a kilometer inland from the position they occupied from April 16, and the Chinese military also left the position they occupied from April 15.

Short история The incident is as follows: on April 15, India announced that about three dozen Chinese soldiers set up camp in the highland region of Ladakh (northeast of Jammu and Kashmir), and the next day Indian soldiers stood on the site a hundred meters from the Chinese camp.

The formal border in Ladakh, actually divided between India and China, has not yet been laid. Therefore, both China and India can assure the world community that the “enemy” has invaded their territory.

Andrei Rezchikov, Ekaterina Yermakova (newspaper "Sight") cite in their material the opinion of experts who believe that China, the first to send soldiers to the disputed area, showed readiness for a peaceful resolution of the conflict.

India and China dispute a stretch of mountainous territory in the north of Kashmir, as well as almost 60 thousand square kilometers in the northeastern state of Arunachal Pradesh. Sergei Mikheyev, head of the CIS Department for Political Technologies, explained to Vzglyad correspondents that the disputes over the territory are of fundamental nature for China: “This is evident from their conflict with Japan over the Senkaku Islands. The islands are actually very little, but the Chinese are very sensitive to this topic. ” The analyst also noted that "now the Chinese feel like active political players, this feeling definitely pushes them."

Amid provocations from Beijing, the Indian line of conduct may seem soft. The difference in the behavior of the parties, explained Comrade Mikheyev, must be sought in political culture: “Such minor provocations are in the style of the Chinese since the 1960's.”

The expert considers the territorial conflict for the Damansky peninsula to be an example of such an approach. In addition to the actual fighting, the Chinese organized demonstrations, placed posters along the border.

The Chinese military, according to the Indian press, demonstrates ingenuity in provocations. In 2012, two Chinese soldiers infiltrated into the Kumar sector, southeast of Ladakh, and destroyed an old Indian army bunker. On the disputed territory, scouts wrote on the walls and rocks: "You are in Chinese territory." At the same time, "propaganda" was conducted from the air: Chinese aircraft penetrated the airspace of India and dropped leaflets, food, cigarettes.

Alexei Maslov, head of the department of oriental studies at the Higher School of Economics, reminded that China is conducting a major geopolitical project: “China is building a new world - parallel to the US world.” By sending its military to the disputed area, China has shown that it has not forgotten anything and is still ready to defend its borders. But after the demonstration of power, he took the soldiers, showing that he was aware of the need to resolve conflicts.

Comrade Maslov recalled that before the BRICS summit in March 2013, the Indian authorities published a report, where they acknowledged their backlog from China, including in the military field. The Chinese army in the disputed area is well mobilized. China provides its own army, but India is the largest buyer weapons. According to the expert, Delhi’s peace loving has a pragmatic meaning: after all, the outcome of the military confrontation in this region would be predetermined.

Moreover, in India social problems, including ethno-confessional ones, are increasing. “It would not be in the interests of the ruling party to unleash a conflict on the border,” said Maslov. “India would not have been able to repay such a regional conflict.”

Hilaria Maria Sala ("La Stampa"; source of the Russian-language text - "Inopressa") cites an excerpt from a joint declaration signed by Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and his Chinese counterpart Li Keqiang: "Countries will not allow their territories to be used for hostile activities towards each other." And another fragment: "Both countries retain the right to choose their own path of political, social and economic development, while the fundamental human rights will take their rightful place." The journalist quotes further: “India and China have historical opportunities for economic and social development, and the implementation of this task will serve the development of peace and prosperity in Asia and in the world. There is enough space in the world for the development of India and China, and the world needs the joint development of two countries that will become partners, but not rivals. ”

Nevertheless, not everything is as beautiful as it is written in the declaration. The results of a survey of Indian public opinion, the journalist writes, show that the parties have to overcome many obstacles. 84% of respondents believe that there is a threat from China. The most beloved country of the inhabitants of India is the United States, but their “love for China” on the 10-scale is estimated to be only four.

According to analyst Sergei Strokan (Kommersant), despite the "reset", the prospects for relations between Delhi and Beijing are very vague. The rivalry between the two members of the BRICS is becoming more pronounced.

“Both sides agreed to restore the status quo that existed before 15 in April of this year,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Sayed Akbaruddin. His Chinese counterpart, Hua Chunin, explained: “After the border confrontation, China and India ultimately showed restraint and demonstrated a constructive approach.”

But observers estimate the prospects of the restart in relations between Delhi and Beijing rather restrained.

Indian political analyst, vice president of the Observer Research Foundation, Nandan Unnikrishnan told Kommersant: “This is a temporary detente. Under the new leadership, China is pursuing an increasingly aggressive course towards not only India, but also other Asian countries. The territorial disputes arising today are just the beginning. ” According to the expert, in the future, the Indo-Chinese relations will be divided into spheres: in some areas they will cooperate, in others they will compete.

Vladimir Skosyrev ("Independent newspaper") recalls that recently the head of the Chinese government, Li Keqiang, called for a climate of trust with India. Fearing that the United States wants to draw it into the anti-Chinese alliance, the guest proposed to increase investment in the country and open doors for Indian exports. The Premier of the State Council of the People's Republic of China during his stay in Delhi emphasized that India became the first country he visited after taking office this year. “Based on deeper mutual trust, our two countries can deepen mutual understanding and build a new type of relationship, promote the successful development of China and India. This will be a real blessing for Asia and the world, ”the premier said.

Chinese media write about the desirability of friendly relations between the "dragon and the elephant." The Communist Party press organ, the Global Times, reports that the West deliberately fanned the hype around the recent conflict between the Indian and Chinese military: "The West is interested in differences between China and India ... China will suffer damage if India begins to pursue the same policy towards China like Japan and the Philippines. ”

Meanwhile, Tatyana Shaumyan, head of the Center for Indian Studies at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, recalled in an interview with NG correspondent that “the border talks have been held between the two powers since 1981. China makes a claim to the territory in 136 thousand square kilometers, which includes the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh. At the same time, the Chinese actually captured more than 30 thousand square kilometers in the western sector, in the Aksai-Chin area. ” These lands are highland and sparsely populated, and for both powers control over them is more a matter of prestige.

During the recent meetings of representatives of India and China, a compromise deal was discussed: India recognizes China’s claims in the western sector, and China recognizes Arunachal Pradesh as Indian land. But this turned out to be an unacceptable option.

The three-day visit of the new Premier of the State Council of the People's Republic of China to Delhi, writes Sergey Strokan (Kommersant), was not accompanied by the signing of important political or trade and economic agreements, and was perceived rather as “a forced handshake through the Himalayas after the recent war of nerves and muscles along the so-called line of actual control (de facto - border length of about 4 thousand km)” .

“The fact that the parties have agreed to negotiate is good news. But there are no guarantees that these efforts will yield positive results, Nandan Unnikrishnan told Kommersant. - After all, before the negotiations on the border there was no movement. And today, the real reason for Beijing’s goodwill gesture was unwillingness to thwart Li Keqiang’s visit to Delhi. ”

Sergey Vasilenkov ( indicates that India will not be able alone to "fight with China", and therefore Delhi has been cooperating with Washington, and he has long wanted to limit China's influence in the world.

The Chinese opposition to the United States, and therefore to India, is indirectly indicated by the fact that Pakistan was the next item on Li Keqiang’s foreign tour. The main purpose of the visit, notes S. Strokan (Kommersant), - strengthen relations with the country perceived by Beijing as a key springboard for deterring the US and India.

The Chinese prime minister said: “I want to confirm China’s strong support for Pakistan’s efforts to preserve independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.” Experts interpreted this statement as a stone in the garden of India - the main antagonist of Pakistan, and at the same time the United States, continuing to launch air strikes at Pakistani territory as part of the so-called fight against terrorism.

The agreements reached during the visit to Pakistan, the analyst notes, will give a new impetus to the development of the strategic deep-water port of Gwadar, located in Pakistan’s Balochistan and in February transferred to the management of the company Chinese Overseas Port Holdings Limited.

Indian political analyst Vinay Shukla told Kommersant: “By developing the infrastructure of Gwadar and demonstrating willingness to finance energy projects and, in particular, the construction of an oil and gas processing complex, Beijing expects to receive a strategic naval base in the Persian Gulf. This will give him additional leverage to deter the US and Indian Navy. ”

Thus, bloodlessly demonstrating military force and at the same time skillfully maneuvering diplomatically, China continues to focus on global expansion. For good reason, the Celestial Empire is the geopolitical “goal” of Washington, publicly voiced by Barack Obama in early January 2012. As for India, it is too early to place its border conflicts with the PRC in the historical archive.

Observed and commented on Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Ragnarek
    Ragnarek 27 May 2013 07: 24
    friendship is possible, but the fact that the United States and bragging rights will "play" on these issues - do not go to the fortuneteller
    1. astra
      astra 27 May 2013 11: 34
      On May 5, India and China withdrew their troops from the disputed territory in the Himalayas.

      Somehow it turned out well for them to agree, but we don’t really mean it:
      On October 14, 2008, the ceremony of transferring OUR TERRITORY to China was held. Tarabarova Island and half of the Bolshoi Ussuriysky Island near Khabarovsk, as well as Bolshoi on the Argun River in the Chita Region, go to China in addition to the agreement on the Russian-Chinese state border. The document was signed in Beijing between Russian President Vladimir Putin and the PRC leadership on October 14, 2004.
      Such extravagance worries, in the entire history of Russia, the rulers tried to increase the territory, and our government easily gives up. After all, it turned out that the Indians and Chinese agreed, why didn’t we agree at one time?
      1. nevopros
        nevopros 27 May 2013 18: 34
        This is not far-sighted. We didn’t give this promise, I’ll note controversial territory. This another elite, approach too - other. They are an enemy from the north not needed. Stop hanging labels of the same color. Stupid and shortsighted.
        1. astra
          astra 27 May 2013 21: 33
          Quote: nevopros
          Stop hanging labels of the same color. Stupid and shortsighted.

          I do not believe in a war with China, but squandering Russian territories is a crime. How long to?! - Alaska, Finland, Poland, Crimea, the countries of the former union, and now China has been given part of the territory and we are flirting with the Japanese in the Kuril Islands, at least we are not refusing firmly.
      2. chunga-changa
        chunga-changa 27 May 2013 22: 34
        We agreed that the border passes along the fairway, which means along the fairway. They used to spit, now it doesn’t work. Friendship is more important to Russia than to China.
    2. Akim
      Akim 27 May 2013 14: 39
      The friendship between China and India is utopia. Anyway, like two housewives in the kitchen. There is a channel CCTV Russian. Sometimes look at the news from him and you will understand everything.
    3. OTAKE
      OTAKE 7 June 2013 16: 56
      Quote: Ragnarek
      friendship is possible, but the fact that the United States and bragging rights will "play" on these issues - do not go to the fortuneteller

      Nobody seems to interfere with the cooperation between Russia and India, there are only conspiracies around you, China has been buying weapons in Russia for how many years, even if someone said a bad word
  2. Belogor
    Belogor 27 May 2013 07: 35
    They will not let them be friends, even if they want it, they will constantly throw up reasons for them to arise various disagreements. In this they are masters.
  3. Dima190579
    Dima190579 27 May 2013 08: 29
    Friendship is friendship and land and resources apart.
  4. OlegYugan
    OlegYugan 27 May 2013 09: 46
    To reconcile the Dragon and the Elephant is in the interests of the Bear. Our interests are the Lord.
    1. Gemar
      Gemar 27 May 2013 12: 09
      Quote: OlegYugan
      To reconcile the Dragon and the Elephant is in the interests of the Bear.

      Where is the logic? On the confrontation between "Dragon and Elephant":
      a) You can earn by supplying weapons to both;
      b) It is possible to distract the attention of the PRC from our borders;
      c) Skillfully play on the fact that Fashington has escalated the situation, making the United States a destabilizer of peace in the region.
      d) As long as China and India have unbounded territories, the entry of the second (India) into NATO is impossible.

      If anyone doubts that the Indians can make a deal with the Devil (joining NATO), think about the dividends that the Indians can get from rapprochement with the United States:
      1) Support for India by the democratic West in the confrontation with China;
      2) Support for India by the democratic West in the confrontation with Pakistan;
      3) The recognition by the Western world of the complete democracy of India and the conformity of its foreign and domestic policies to universal human values ​​(civilization);
      4) Serious investment in production in India;
      5) By transferring US technology information on the FGFA (and therefore on the T-50), Indians can get some technology from the Americans;

      If someone thinks that India is with us forever and will never betray us ... Remember what you said about the PRC. And now
      Quote: astra
      On October 14, 2008, the ceremony of transferring OUR TERRITORY to China was held. Tarabarova Island and half of the Bolshoi Ussuriysky Island near Khabarovsk, as well as Bolshoi on the Argun River in the Chita Region, go to China in addition to the agreement on the Russian-Chinese state border. The document was signed in Beijing between Russian President Vladimir Putin and the PRC leadership on October 14, 2004.

      As the Chinese themselves tell me, THIS IS ONLY THE BEGINNING!
      Threat Oleg Chuvakin, as always good
      1. posad
        posad 27 May 2013 19: 31
        Very reasonably painted everything. We need to learn to bleed. This, of course, is very difficult. There, even the great Stalin was very well burned on this, and nevertheless, it is necessary to improve on this issue.
        India already skillfully throws us off with the purchases of our weapons and focuses on the American. Okay. The United States is interested in India as an antagonist of China. We, too. Why don't we be friends together on this issue? And by the way, help China against the United States. Now China, in comparison with the United States, is weak militarily. Well, let it be, but there are many ambitions - and that's good. We must support him in this madness. If not by deed, then by advice: provoke a conflict between China and Japan, Israel's conflict with Iran. As the saying goes: "the claw gets stuck - the end of the whole bird." The United States will stand up for Israel, China for Iran. Oil is China's weak link. Yes, they created 4-month oil reserves, but this is not enough.
        If we want to survive, we must provoke a war in the Persian Gulf. Everything is ready there. Waiting for boobies team. The wick in Syria is smoldering. Waiting for
    2. posad
      posad 27 May 2013 19: 20
      What is our interest?
  5. Egen
    Egen 27 May 2013 10: 07
    The dragon animal is more aggressive than the herbivorous elephant, however, the enraged elephant is also not sugar :)
    An alliance of China and India - this would be a new century on Earth - it is even difficult to imagine what effect such a concentration of people, resources, industry, money, and weapons could have. That is why "they will not give it" ... And the dragon would rather eat the elephant than be friends :) By the way, for Russia it would probably mean the loss of the arms market. And there is a considerable likelihood that a vestor of a not very friendly policy will be directed against us - and against whom else, Pakistan is, by and large, a trifle, the United States is far away, and not very protected Russia is nearby :(
    1. Gemar
      Gemar 27 May 2013 12: 14
      Quote: Egen
      The United States is far away, and not-very-protected Russia is near :(

      Verily! +++
      Only Pakistan should not be underestimated either. Still, a nuclear power. And in Afghanistan, both the Chinese and the packs did not support us.
      1. nevopros
        nevopros 27 May 2013 18: 41
        And in whose hands are the "buttons" from this nuclear weapon?
        1. Gemar
          Gemar 27 May 2013 19: 10
          Quote: nevopros
          And in whose hands are the "buttons" from this nuclear weapon?

          I will not say. Suddenly you are spies ... wassat
          Well, to be honest, enlighten me, in whose hands are the "buttons"?
      2. posad
        posad 27 May 2013 19: 36
        Now Russia has managed to establish excellent relations with Pakistan. They are also very tired of it.
        For us, the support of Pakistan will be extremely important after the withdrawal of the Alliance forces from Afghanistan. The situation there will rule China, which has traditionally good relations with the Taliban. China will harness the natural wealth of Afghanistan and pay the Taliban. And not only pay, but also set the Taliban against Russia.
        We understand this very well. As the saying goes: "Who gets who" or "Who got up first - that and the tanks"
        1. Gemar
          Gemar 28 May 2013 10: 46
          Quote: posad
          "Who got up first - that and the tanks"

          good + + +
          Quote: posad
          China will harness the natural wealth of Afghanistan and pay the Taliban. And not only pay, but also set the Taliban against Russia.

          There is no need to incite too much ... China will redirect, I quote you, "Afgan's natural wealth" to Russia, and again Interior Ministry investigators will start dying with a syringe at their desk, as happened in the 90s. recourse
  6. OlegYugan
    OlegYugan 27 May 2013 10: 28
    The United States is far away, and not-very-protected Russia is near :(
    Sir, what are you talking about ???? In the 21st century, distance is not a problem, and why did you get that Russia is unprotected, yes, I agree there are gaps, you got after the collapse of the union, but the work is still intensive. Russia for China is cheese in a mousetrap, but Africa is a pie on a silver platter. It is necessary to help the Chinese comrades in Africa to turn around and not flattery, and not even think about Russia.
    1. Gemar
      Gemar 27 May 2013 12: 24
      Quote: OlegYugan
      Sir, what are you talking about ????

      I think it's about geography. laughing
      Quote: OlegYugan
      Russia for China is cheese in a mousetrap

      The Chinese do not think so.
      Quote: OlegYugan
      Need to help Chinese comrades in Africa turn around

      No need to help the Chinese in any field. They regard any help as fear and awe of the growing China.
      They built factories in Guangzhou (why do you think Western investments flowed there because the USSR helped China create an industrial reserve in the South), they gave them a nuclear bomb, they taught them how to build, they launched a taikonaut into space ... I’m asking the Chinese how they are relate to the invaluable assistance of the USSR / RF, so they make eyes like those of Europeans (large and round) and say that they achieved everything themselves. And what they say to us (Russian), they say, is impudent propaganda.
      Quote: OlegYugan
      In the 21st century, distance is not a problem

      The question is not in distances, but in the geopolitical interests of the powers.
      With respect! hi
  7. Consul-t
    Consul-t 27 May 2013 10: 43
    Read the article. China is very sensitive to territorial disputes.
    We need to study the habits of a possible enemy.
    Siberia is open. One and a half people per square kilometer.
    Only force can hold back the outbreak of war in the region.
  8. orff
    orff 27 May 2013 11: 06
    Since the end of 2012, India has been an observer in the organization of the SCO. The main objectives of the organization are proclaimed the strengthening of stability and security in a wide space uniting the participating states, the fight against terrorism, separatism, extremism, drug trafficking, the development of economic cooperation, energy partnerships, scientific and cultural interaction. The Uyghur problem between India and China really prevents us from building equal relations between Russia, India and China.
    Absolutely ALL smoldering territorial conflicts support the Anglo-Saxons. That would be to find a territorial good neighborly understanding without the participation of peacekeepers such as the United States and small-shavens. Then BRIC and SCO will gain unprecedented authority in the world!
    1. Gemar
      Gemar 27 May 2013 18: 11
      Quote: orff
      Uyghur problem between India and China

      The Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Republic is the former East Turkestan, and what about the Hindus? Enlighten, maybe I don’t know what. hi
      1. orff
        orff 27 May 2013 22: 34
        The Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region (XUAR), being the westernmost region of China, borders on Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Mongolia, the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir.
        The unified telecommunications superhighway Shanghai - Frankfurt is passing through Xinjiang. China can close the ways of transporting gas and oil from the Caspian basin to the Asia-Pacific Region (APR) through Xinjiang. It is also important that the XUAR borders on Tibet. Washington’s occasional uproar about Tibetan rights violations is another of the propaganda warfare against China. The United States strongly supports opposition Uyghur movements outside the PRC. One of them is the World Uyghur Congress, whose president is dissident Rabiyat Kadyr, one of the richest people in China. He maintains relations with a number of American congressmen, with George W. Bush. Rabiyat Kadir is a promoted symbol of Uyghur resistance.
        Washington mainly uses three channels to put pressure on the PRC - via Taiwan, Tibet and Xinjiang, and among Muslims-Uyghurs of Xinjiang, separatist protests are usually especially acute. Therefore, the United States will continue to benevolently observe the development of Uyghur nationalism, promoting, as far as possible, its radicalization ...
        The most significant transport corridors on the western border are the Dzungarian Gate border passage connecting Xinjiang with Kazakhstan, as well as the Karakorum corridor through which China and Pakistan communicate. There are a number of other passages and corridors - however, the mountainous nature of the area poses an extremely difficult task for China to organize year-round transport links in this direction. The difficulty lies in the fact that the Karakoram corridor passes through the disputed territories of India and Pakistan, India and China, which creates difficulties in the strategic planning of its use.
        1. Gemar
          Gemar 28 May 2013 10: 50
          Quote: orff
          Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region (XUAR)

          Poor I taught the geography of the PRC ... hi Plus +++
  9. OlegYugan
    OlegYugan 27 May 2013 12: 44
    To drive a wedge between the Dragon and the Elephant, and deeper - it is in the interests of the arrogant Saxons, but not in our interests. To reconcile these two tasks is not an easy task. In the bushes there is still a snake (Pakistan) - a trained Naglosaks cobra - and a still unstable Afghanistan, territorially bordering the Dragon, on the side. So the knot there is still tied.
    What about India joining NATO laughing Do not tell my horseshoes.
    1. Gemar
      Gemar 27 May 2013 13: 20
      Quote: OlegYugan
      And about the entry of India into NATO. Do not tell my horseshoes.

      What is your reasoned position! laughing
      Maybe you want to say that the Indians only out of respect for us disdain entry into NATO? About 30 years ago, no one dared to think that Georgia and Ukraine (little depends on the people here, this is the choice of the elite, it will be necessary, and a referendum of 80% will show wink ) will dream of joining the alliance. Who knew that the Baltic states would be a member of NATO? Now it is already a reality.
      So do not promise that the Indians will feel the presence of benefits for themselves, no "funny horseshoes" will keep them from joining.
      Quote: OlegYugan
      Reconcile these two task is not an easy agree.

      Why put up with them? What dividends will receive from this RF? Probably, India will buy weapons from China, in case of rapprochement. And brazenly copied from us. I repeat, the United States can be blamed for the disagreements between them, creating a negative image in the eyes of the world community
      Quote: OlegYugan
      arrogant saxons
  10. OlegYugan
    OlegYugan 27 May 2013 13: 53
    First, India's accession to NATO is impossible at least geographically, Second; India just seceded from the English Empire, and now again on the same "rake" to attack, another thing is that it is being pushed there hard. You know who.
    Why put up with them? Such a position is short-sighted and counterproductive. India and China are half the world's population, and I do not wish them war, because I'm a Russian man.
    1. Gemar
      Gemar 27 May 2013 16: 57
      Quote: OlegYugan
      India's entry into NATO is impossible, at least geographically

      Participants in the Accelerated Alliance Dialogue:
      Ukraine, Georgia.
      Individual Affiliate Plan Members:
      Azerbaijan, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Moldova.

      Those. Azerbaijan is hypothetically capable of joining NATO. Plus they have the resources to buy NATO weapons. And geography has nothing to do with it.
      In addition to joining the alliance, India can simply cooperate with the United States, as do Australia, the UAE, etc. Entry is optional.
      NATO's main goal is collective defense. In this case, geography can also be sacrificed.
      Quote: OlegYugan
      Such a position is short-sighted and counterproductive.

      I will answer by analogy (with the complete presence of a lack of argumentation request ):
      This position is very far-sighted and productive.
      Quote: OlegYugan
      I don’t wish them war, because Russian I’m a man.

      I do not wish them war either. However, I will give an example - as long as South Ossetia is an unrecognized state, Georgia will not join NATO. This means that the United States will not have official justification to take the side of Georgia in the event of repeated aggression against Russia.
      I do not wish evil to these countries ... although what to dissemble ... China, after nine years of living in it, I wish good a little more than to the Americans (after what I saw in the village of Arthur on the graves of our soldiers). However, I would not want to see hundreds of thousands of Chinese killed in the news. Hindus all the more. I JUST DO NOT WANT THEY CLOSER! The less they are friends with each other, the more likely they are to sell them weapons.
  11. knn54
    knn54 27 May 2013 15: 02
    Pew agency published a poll, according to which. 62% of Chinese are unfriendly towards India, (48% have the same attitude to the USA).
    The Chinese authorities believe that ... Indian politics has a "hegemonic mentality", and its main principle is "friendship with distant people and attack on neighbors."
    Delhi is increasingly moving closer to the oil monarchies, while Beijing, on the contrary, supports Tehran.
    India and China are openly vying for the Brahmaputra hydropower, which is why the Chinese are the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh. Beijing wants to build four dams on the river. For India, a decrease in water flow will lead to a decrease in agricultural production due to irrigation problems. India is not averse to building a couple of hydroelectric power stations.
    The PRC follows the precepts of Mao Zedong, "Tibet is the palm of China, and Nepal, Ladakh, Bhutan, Sikkim and Nagaland are its five fingers." The separatists operating in Nagaland receive support from the PRC. After the Maoist revolution, "pro-Indian" Nepal fell into the sphere of influence of Beijing ...
    Delhi is actively cooperating with Vietnam in the military sphere, as well as in the development of deposits on the shelf, which the PRC also claims. Both sides are ready to send ships to protect their interests.
    India and China are actively competing in Africa. India is not going to "concede its position" to China, which finds support from another British dominion, South Africa.
    And the repeated statements by the PRC leadership that the country's foreign policy is independent and independent and the PRC is opposed to any alliances does not inspire optimism.
    PS Delhi, despite long and strong relations with Moscow, is slowly “drifting” towards the West. In the foreseeable future, Russia will probably have to make a choice between traditional partners.
  12. posad
    posad 27 May 2013 18: 22
    Everyone is interested in the conflict between China and India, including and Russia. For Russia, this is a chance to seriously weaken China and increase arms supplies to India. Neither China nor India are our allies. And from those and others should be expected to stab in the back.
    We need to remember one thing: Russia has no allies. We need to learn how to pit others and not fight ourselves. Russia's task: strengthening the economy and solving demographic problems.
    Now, if, against the backdrop of the conflict between India and China, the United States should be tied into a collision .....
    1. Gemar
      Gemar 27 May 2013 19: 12
      Quote: posad
      For Russia, this is a chance to seriously weaken China and increase arms supplies to India. Neither China nor India are our allies. And from those and others should be expected to stab in the back.

      I subscribe to every word! +++ drinks
      Quote: posad
      We need to remember one thing: Russia has no allies.

  13. sun
    sun 27 May 2013 18: 32
    eternal only interest