The Pak-China and USA Algorithm

The USA can do more to put pressure on Pakistan to act on terrorists. One way of doing so is by involving China in the equation.

The news about a certain level of breakdown in the Pakistan-China ties has been in the newspapers for the last couple of days. Despite the excited editorials in every daily about the issue, this crisis, excuse the exaggeration, is far from anything anybody should be excited about. The consequences of deteriorating Pak-China relations, when studied keeping in mind the various geo-political and economic factors, are not positive globally.

One of the most important geo-political factors that needs to be kept in mind is the decision of the United States to showcase a close relationship of sorts with Pakistan to the international media. The prime reason for this is, of course, the continued reluctance on the part of the Pakistani administration to take concrete action against the terrorist havens which still continue to exist in the country resulting in an increase in the number of drone attacks carried out by the USA on Pakistani territory.

A major roadblock to the Pakistan government's resolution to eliminate terrorism is the conservative view of world affairs held by many in the top brass of the Pakistan Army, the de-facto decision-maker at times. However due to this insistence on non-acknowledgement of the existence of terrorist havens in the country, the relations between Pakistan and its once upon a time all weather friends are certainly being tested.

New reports indicate that, along with the many anti-India and anti-West terrorist havens that operate in the south-east Asian country, many Uighur sympathizers have also set up havens for the struggle against the Chinese government in the province of Xinjiang.

The Chinese government has repeatedly made its displeasure over the existence of such anti-China institutions in the country known to the Pakistan government. Yet, due to rampant corruption and sympathizers within the administration, not much has been done in this regard resulting in a continued anti-China resistance in Xinjiag with majority of the support received by the protestors being traced back to Pakistan.

Though this is primarily an area of conflict between Pakistan and China, the US authorities must also keep a keen eye on the developments surrounding these incidences. Despite the inability of many western countries to convince Pakistan to cancel terrorism as a state policy, China has to an extent succeeded or at least performed better than the other western countries, considering the drop in the number of terrorist/freedom struggle incidences now reported in China which can be traced back to Pakistan.

Adopting such an approach of being convinced that there has been a drop in the above mentioned activities appears optimistic considering the lack of information coming out of China. However, when we look at the situation in the context of national security, there has been a slight shift in allied positions from the USA to China under President Zardari's regime. Though the shift is not absolute, it is easily noticeable.

Thus, despite the numerous long term concerns that the White House may have regarding Pakistan's closeness to China, it is only sensible in the short run to encourage greater Pakistan-China engagement on terrorism as that might be the only possible way to deter Pakistan from hosting terrorists on its soil. The fear of being isolated internationally, withdrawal of US and western world's support from major contracts and treaties internationally without adopting sanctions as a means of approach and at the same time portraying China as a reluctant ally of Pakistan would be the most surrealistic of all possible methods to get the Pakistani administration started on its fight against terrorism.

However as surrealistic as the above scenario may sound, it is possible for the United States to manipulate its positions a bit to get a more positive response from Pakistan. An example of such a manipulation would be to stress the importance of banishing terrorism from all forms of practice to the new Chinese Premier and President (both Mr Jiabao and Mr Jintao handing over power to their successors during the year) while at the same time steering clear of the human rights aspect of the situation in Xinjiag. Such a manoeuvre by the USA would ensure that enough pressure is put on Pakistan to curb terrorist activities while at the same time, it won't be seen as the US stepping back on its demand for human rights and their implementation all over the world.

Though idealistic, only such manoeuvres have been known through out time to change the course of history as we know it.

Why India must work on its Foreign Policy

Given the status that India currently enjoys in the diplomatic world, it is only natural that India be required to make tough decisions.

The diplomatic power of a country can be analysed by simply taking together factors that act for and against the state at the international level and the state's ability to work out a plan to balance out the negatives that it may face. United States can be considered to be a country that is more or less able to balance out the negatives at the international level (recent 'stand-off' with Russia and China on the Syria and Iran issue can be considered to be a negative that it hasn't balanced out in the UN). 

If we look at India under the same lens, then a couple of inconsistencies do crop up which are common in countries which are still developing their diplomatic power (i.e focus more on the soft power). One of the major  problems that the current foreign policy of India has is the inability to move out of the neutrality sphere. 

After the end of the Cold War, the diplomatic world underwent a period of 'secondary power vacuum' wherein, the west was able to take major decisions without being challenged in a manner that would threaten its dominance in the diplomatic world. Yet soon countries like Russia, China and India caught up and three together are no able to form a major opposition to the west at the international level.

Thus while the three are able to form a formidable opposition, India's foreign policy still hasn't evolved enough to take a stand with one side and through out the course of the event remain on the same side. One of the major example of this would be the recent decision by the Indian government to send a diplomat to attend the Friends of Syria meet which is considered to be an anti-Assad and a pro-change forum. This decision has certainly raised a few eyebrows towards the effectiveness of the Indian bureaucracy and government in formulating a foreign policy meant for the long term.

While at the same time, this can be considered to a successful practice by India of its principle-based foreign policy. However such a practice cannot be considered to be an exactly ideal path to follow at the international level and thus a certain reworking of the foreign policy is in order as India tries to analyse the pro-cons of its relationship with various countries in this every changing world.

Democratizing the Nuclear Neighbour

Despite the fears of a coup, India must ensure that conditions are maintained to retain some state of democracy in its nuclear neighbour.

Historically, relations between the Pakistan Army and the Indian government haven't exactly been friendly. Since Independence, they have bordered at extreme paranoia and complete distrust. Attempts to start/maintain peace between the two neighbours has seen the civilian government in Pakistan asking for the "go-ahead" from the Army. In case the above hasn't been done, the efforts to achieve peace have been scuttled at the very basic stage.

Thus, it is not in India's interest to allow the Pakistani Army into power. But any attempt to do so by using "unacceptable" methods would only ensure that the public opinion tilts in favour of the Army (something that has for the last couple of years prevented the army from coming to power). A more intelligent approach would involve encouraging the civilian institutions in Pakistan to maintain their grip on power mainly by covering them in the mainstream Indian and international news media. 

Also covert funding to moderate pressure groups in Pakistan would be an ideal path that the RAW (India's spy agency) can take in order to ensure that the public opinion remains in favour of the civilian institutions while at the same time ensuring that a balance is attained with the extremists. A situation resembling the current Indian state of affairs (extremely active civil society) would provide democracy the much needed boost that it requires in the country which has a history of democracies being overthrown by military coups.

For India, a military government is not acceptable considering the fact that all the wars that India has fought against Pakistan happened during the military rule. Thus any attempt to install an army government in Pakistan can only succeed if the 'terror of India' is created in the minds of the Pakistani people. The paranoia regarding India has always been the stepping stone that the Pakistan Army has needed to hoist itself to a position of direct power (indirect power involves tremendous amount of influence on the civilian government while refraining to portray itself as a major political power in the public eyes).

A face off with the US (though highly unlikely) would certainly create the buzz that the Pakistani Army needs while at the same time uncomfortable relations with India would certainly put the civilian government in an uncomfortable position. Thus attempts to improve ties between India and Pakistan should be on the top of the priority list for Pakistan.

Closer trade ties involve direct interaction between the people and thus the mistrust on either side is reduced every day little by little. It is only through such attempts of improving ties while at the same time not 'bowing down' with/to other countries in the public eye can the current government in power hold on to its present position and last till the next elections where the verdict might or might not go against them.

On the other side of the globe, it would be ideal if USA took steps so as to improve the ties with the current government in Pakistan at least till the elections are over. A civilian government in power is the only way the USA can attempt to get rid of the Taliban and terrorism which has time and again proved to be a strategic asset for Pakistan against its rivals in the Indian subcontinent.

Why India needs to intervene

Despite the anger in Pakistan regarding the NATO strike, it would be a wise decision for India to play the peacemaker between Pakistan and USA.

With the emotions of the populace boiling up, it is rare to see the leaders of a country take the right decision instead of the popular one. The leaders in Pakistan are faced with the same puzzle at the moment. With anger against the NATO and the USA rising, it would be wise for the Pakistani leadership to look at their present situation in a whole some manner and not overlook one aspect just because the pressure on the other aspect to be viewed is greater.

All the warnings, talks and decisions that are being given/taken by the civilian government/army in Pakistan would have tremendous consequences not only for Pakistan but also for the region as a whole. The US-Pakistani relationship has had a lot of bumps ever since the Abottabad raid but since then, this can be said to be the single worst incident in the relations of the two country. 

US presence in Pakistan and Afghanistan is essential for India's national security and also the security of the Indian interests is heavily dependent on the US presence there fore the time being at least, as India starts to play a greater role in Afghanistan and have a greater say in matters. Thus, the removal of the US boots from Pakistan would be a major blow to India and its interests. With the vacating of the Shamsi Airbase (if that happens), the entire incident would be a major strategic victory for the Taliban, which has many sympathizers in the Pakistan Army, which is making attempts to come back to power in Afghanistan.

India would now require to act in order to protect its interests. First of all, the Indian administration must ensure that Pakistan gets the message that India sympathizes with them and then slowly and steadily work would need to be done to ensure that the US do not vacate the Shamsi Airbase. Many in Pakistan have already viewed this 'accidental' attack as a direct attack by USA and India on their sovereignty, which has already been an issue of contention between the once upon a time allies (USA and Pakistan) for quite some time. Any more fuel into this fire would only result in consequences for the entire region including China, who want the US to exit from the region in order for them to achieve a greater level of influence on the struggling Afghan civilian government.

With the exit of the US troops from the region it would be very easy for the Taliban to take back control of the areas near the North-Western border of Pakistan and Afghanistan, which has very limited government presence with majority of the area being tribal in nature guaranteeing a firm base for the Taliban to make a comeback into the region and the regional politics.

India would need to bring the two allies to the table and ensure that both of them engage in a healthy discussion and sort out their differences at the earliest, if India wants to ensure a peaceful and stable neighbourhood. Manmohan Singh could play a major role in bringing the two to the table using the respect and influence that he has earned in the government circles of the both, the US and Pakistan.

Till then it can be expected that with the pressure on the government and the army in Pakistan building up to take a strict action against the US, the relations between the two allies can only expected to go downhill, if there is one. The US would need to play calmly at the moment in order to prevent the situation from worsening. But it sure isn't going to be a easy journey to keep track of unless and until India does not intervene.

Walking the Pakistani Tightrope

Even though relations between the two rivals are normalizing. It is in vast contrast to what lays underneath the surface.

The move by Pakistan to grant India the MFN (Most Favoured Nation) status was welcomed by a big majority in the diplomatic circles and was hailed as move towards a shift in the relationship between the two nuclear states. Manmohan Singh and Yousuf Raza Gilani who met in Maldives recently decided to break the deadlock that the two countries were in since after 26/11. Yet there continue to be rumors that there is a lot more than meets the eyes.

The UPA government which is at the moment at its lowest ever in public popularity is doings its desperate best in an attempt save face. With allegations against members of India Against Corruption rising, the government at the moment remains fairly convinced that it might have a chance in the state elections that are coming up in the next two years leading up to the general election in 2014. But even as the elections at the state level happen, there is a lot of reason for the UPA to take care in the way it deals with issues like terrorism, nowadays a major vote-puller in India.

Though the number of attacks in the country have decreased a lot, there still continues to exist a state of uncertainty among the populace as they deal with a neighbour (Pakistan) which every day heads close to either a military coup or take over by Islamic fundamentalists. The anger in India continues to be at the same level as after 26/11 with many a facebook pages coming up with negative results regarding celebrating the return to normal relations between India and Pakistan. Youth in India is eyeing every development with a keen eye, ready to get out on the street and corner the government for any mistake that they make. Hence, the ability of the UPA government to deal effectively with Pakistan will determine their odd of winning the upcoming elections. 

Carefully keeping the 'Kashmir' issue off the table, the government has succeeded in brushing of concerns of an 'unfavorable' round of table talks. With an on-going dispute between Omar Abdullah, the Jammu Kashmir Chief Minister, and the army already heating up the atmosphere in the country, including the Kashmir issue would have been a certain death warrant for the present Government. But the step to not include talks on punishment of the terrorist is also a bold step for this government which faces continuous flak from BJP, the primary opposition party,  for any and every mistake that it is committing in recent times.

Hence any progress between the two countries at best is balanced on a thin line at the moment. With internal pressure mounting on the UPA government to prove it's worth, the Pakistan card might just be the trump card that the government desperately needs at the moment. If India is successful in getting Pakistan to hand or even punish the culprits of the 26/11 attack, then it will be a guarantee that the odds against the Congress for the 2014 general election would have been countered and all parties would be on the same starting point.

Thus even as India tries to do its best to reach out to Pakistan, India's friendliness would directly depend on what Pakistan is able to do against terrorism. Any further attack on Indian soil would not only damage but paralyze the relationship for a long time if not permanently. Thus the onus is now on Pakistan to show results as the UPA government puts everything on line for their Pakistan card.

The Era of Poker Diplomacy

The world political scenario can at any given point of time be viewed as a game of poker – with a difference. The participants (countries) are playing not for money, but the ability to influence decisions at a regional as well as global level. For long the players have been recurrently changing with each player being replaced by a new one. Thus there is a constant continuity in this whole cycle along with greater participation by different countries which prevents an unrivalled uni-polar system from being established.

Since the Soviet Union’s fall, world diplomacy has been entirely dominated by the Western Hemisphere. As true as this fact may be, an entirely different situation is unfolding right before us. With the US Budget Deficit crisis continuing, it’s expected that Uncle Sam might replace its expensive military programs with a new policy which excludes active US involvement during a crisis.
For starters, US has been giving pro-active assistance to rebel groups in enemy states like Iran. Modern weaponry is being supplied to nations like Saudi Arabia in the middle-east as advance policing fee for the region when USA exits from Iraq. Critics of this theory highlight the increased US involvement in Pakistan as a counter theory but the fact remains that this involvement of the US is not at a proactive level. This role that the US is trying to fit itself into is that of an observer state. To maintain its domination while staying an observer state, it must forge excellent relations with the countries that counter-balance its enemies - and one of the biggest threats at the moment for Uncle Sam is the growing clout of the People’s Republic.

What constitutes the pot?

Accumulating absolute power is often the reason for these ‘international’ poker games. Migration, an international economy that is in danger zone and acquisition of arms by both legal and illegal entities are crises faced by modern nation states. Enhanced awareness of human rights and improvements in the regional as well as the global economy, political and security scenarios are the only remedy to this problem. These collectively determine the path that a country may take for the acquisition of resources to achieve its ends.

China can be quoted as an example of a state that has adopted an active-aggressive approach in order to address its ends. This hypothesis is based on past positions adopted by the Chinese government on various issues like Chinese claims of ‘indisputable sovereignty’ over the South China Sea, treatment of citizens of Jammu and Kashmir and incursions by Chinese troops beyond its borders. All these actions have directed negative attention on China and disturbed policy-makers in distant countries. Of the various solutions devised, none seems as effective as portrayal of India as a counter balance.

In order to counter the Dragon, the Indian Elephant is being portrayed as the future global power. This has led to certain questions that have certainly puzzled the western policy makers and have even started to baffle them (read the Copenhagen scenario). The question that is being repeatedly asked is: Is the West trying to push its luck a bit too far by pitching India against China?

Playing a bluff a little too often?

“The most likely scenario is that of a competitive relationship, unbuffered by extensive economic ties, but without a significant possibility of armed conflict.” (Frankel and Harding, 2004)

Despite being pitched against each other repeatedly, the two Eastern giants have also come together to act as a counter balance against the US. This counter balancing act practiced by India and China is based mainly on issues of development and environment with respect to the developed and developing country differences. Thus as the western hemisphere retreats, the two Asian giants have started following their respective policies in order to generate a clout for themselves.

China has followed a policy of what is known as ‘flexing their might’ which involves showing off the military strength of the country and thereby subduing the opponents. They are doing it in a manner which has caused some brows to sweat in Washington DC, New Delhi and even Tokyo. The rapid Chinese military build up along the borders is seen as an act of aggression. Some neighbours try to counter it, as in India’s case by bolstering the military capabilities while countries like Japan approach Washington for support where they are given the same reassurances of assistance in case of a crisis.

However, “South Asian states are concerned about the fallout of a potential conflict between the Unites States and China if Beijing becomes more assertive or Washington decides to adopt a more aggressive containment policy towards Beijing.” (Cooney and Sato, 2009) The Dragon perceives its aggression only as a precaution against encirclement by the US and its allies. Almost all countries neighbouring China have some form of close ties with NATO (a major US ally). Be it Philippines, Thailand, Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, Australia or India, all share a close relationship with the US with some having a kind of a treaty with the US guaranteeing US assistance during crisis.

Thus it can be said that the Chinese fear of America is not an irrational thought made up by a government which is trying to divert attention from its internal problems. At the same time, the Indian fear is that of a total Chinese controlled South Asia which would be the biggest challenge to achieving a status at par with the US in the future; and India also has its fair share of theories of how the Chinese are expanding their support base.

The present Look East policy of the Indian government seems to lack that excitement which had originally resulted in success. For example, there has been little publicity regarding the work that India is doing in the countries which are a part of the Look East policy. It was only after the Chinese started advancing into Myanmar that the Indian government opened its eyes and stepped up its efforts to reach to the people of Myanmar. However, there’s been very little progress after that. Thus India has been taking a less pro-active stand on how it wants to go about making inroads into other countries except the West and Russia.

Nations close to both India and China have naturally been wary of their ambitions. However, this is more so the case with China as many countries fear the Chinese expansion dream i.e. the Greater China dream and this is where the US comes in. It has given these countries many guarantees regarding their safety.

However, how long will these assurances last?

Which player will call a fold?

As the pot keeps on getting bigger and bigger, the chance of kicking off a row also gets bigger. The important question, however, is: who will be the first to call a fold. A fold in this game has tremendous effects which affect both the political and economic functions of the country. For instance, the demise of the Soviet Union saw many socialist or communist economies shifting to the capitalist fold. Hence, if any shift is to take place, the consequences will be bigger than what they were when the Soviet Era came to an end.

The diplomatic power of a country is vastly affected by the monetary condition of the country. For starters, an increasing budget deficit means that other countries are a little wary of buying its currency bonds which dries up a source of finance to manage unsustainable expense. This results in spending cuts across the board in order to reduce this deficit and regain the confidence of those other countries. Certain departments like Defence are the first to be hit by budget and spending cuts which directly impacts the military might and thereby the arm-twisting strength. Inevitable budget cuts to other areas like Development Aid also reduce the clout of the country as nations shift their allegiance to more generous nations.

The West has been suffering from a self-created economic crisis. The current double-dip recession, for instance, can be attributed to the Bill Clinton Administration. Emerging countries like India and China don’t face such problems. A large amount of sustainable fund will always be easily available to them. Creation of efficient and sustainable infrastructure is the problem they face. Despite credible advances in infrastructure, they still lack sustainability and the problems like the recent China super-fast train crash only add worry.

Another aspect that adds shine to a country at the international level is the respect for human rights shown by the country and the amount of freedom that its citizens have been given. India triumphs over China in this regard, having been recognised by the International Community as a true Democracy. This gives India its fair share of positive light on the International Stage along with the constant pressures of upholding the functioning of democratic institutions in a nation which is becoming home to active participation of citizens in various matters of policy, be it economic or political in nature.

Hence if we were to look at this game of poker in a holistic manner, we can say that the developed countries can still take calls on diplomatic matters only if their internal politics allows them to take significant decisions. At the same time, India and China perform better than their counterparts despite their fair share of problems, provided both are on the same side of the table.

The conclusion of the events down at South China Sea might help us in coming up with an answer to the question India or China but until then, I would as an investor like to invest in both of them equally.

To use Wall Street lingo, one should not expect any gains or losses, but in the long run, as the players revaluate their strategies and come up with the perfect consumer pitch, the sight of the bull and the bear will become common. Till then, let’s allow the speculators to earn their bread.

Thus for the time-being as players work on their strategy and the speculators operate the market, the game stretches on to infinity.

Bibliography

1. Frankel, F.R and Harding, H, (2004), “The India-China relationship: what the United States needs to know”, Columbia University Press.
2. Cooney, J.K and Sato, Y, (2009), “The rise of China and international security: America and Asia respond”, Routledge

Master of Disguises

Source

      The critics have dubbed it a Failed State, the security agencies have named it a Terrorist State and the human rights activists have called it a Military State. So many names for one state of Pakistan. Well that is certainly the result of the many disguises that the Pakistani agencies work in. No need to say what half of them are. Yes they are some terrorist outfit plotting their attacks on innocent civilians from at times ISI safe houses. So what is it that has happened? Has Pakistan done too much for these terrorists for the terrorists to call Pakistan their home. Well so it seems. However I won't be talking about terrorism on this post. This article is dealt towards understanding the dual policy that Pakistan is following.

      Pakistan has warned the United States against any further drone strikes conducted within its borders and also any unilateral military action taken inside its territory. But is this a farcical show of strength? Is it just a statement issued by the weak civilian government to please the people and the army. The army would be more than happy with that statement because it would help them to get higher budget while at time same time show the public that they still exert influence on the government which it most desperately needs to show due to the rising criticism for them. Thus there are many different angles to this one play that is being stage on the world arena.

      If reports are to be believed than according to them, Pakistan had a pact with USA that if the US finds Bin Laden in Pakistan's territory than they shall be allowed to take unilateral action while Pakistan will be allowed to criticize them and give them warnings just to show the public that they are against such violations of their sovereignty. Now if that is true than I am not quite sure about Pakistan's future as a sovereign country. How can it be that an operation is carried out by another country within the territory of another country and that country doesn't even do anything about it? Because they simply can't. One must not forget the one very important that Pakistan needs at this time and that is 'AID'.

      Almost all the aid that Pakistan gets from the USA is spent on the military but some of it is utilized to keep the economy afloat. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the Pakistan economy cannot survive long without continuous economic aid from the United States. The reason why the economy is in shambles is because of the negligence of the government. Pakistani Government never invested smartly for the country's future and if you come to think of it they got the most fertile land in the country after the partition.

      However there are certain sectors that are threatening to boycott the US aid but that may just turn out to be nothing but a publicity stunt being done by an extremist candidate up for elections. If the military is mum and not doing anything about it than there isn't much that can or will be done. And as time goes, the Pakistani people will forget about the incident but the extremists and the terrorist funded by the ISI will not. Thus the ongoing proxy war against the US planned and put into action by Pakistan will go on.

      So in short they can't do much except criticize the US and fund terrorist networks to increase attacks on Americans because after all money talks. So in short we will only be hearing statements made by the Pakistan leadership and acts of terrorism against the US and that is all that there is to it. After all statements can be forgotten but actions cannot and the US is one country that will never forget it if Pakistan does something against them. So in the end, it is the "you give me money, and I won't do anything 'publicly'."

The US-Pakistan Relationship: Friend or Foe?

    For a long term relationship to last, trust needs to be there. But in the case of the American-Pakistan partnership trust has not been something that was meant to be there. The Americans changed their interaction with Pakistan when the Iron Curtain fell and they started becoming Pro-India but they later had to change this position of theirs due to the 9/11 terrorist attacks which resulted in the US declaring war on Afghanistan.

    Afghanistan was a poor third world country that was far away from them and which had witnessed numerous political events in the past decades. But now that they had invaded the landlocked country it became important for the US to strike a partnership(short-term) with Pakistan in order to prevent terrorists from entering Pakistan and escaping the 'American Wrath'. But that was never meant to be.

    Though the partnership was struck but Pakistan under the dictatorial regime allowed the Taliban to enter and hide in Pakistan. The Pakistani Government thought that they could now get the best of both worlds. They would terrorize India using the vast number of terrorists who had arrived in Pakistan and also by threatening India by the weapons gifted by Uncle Sam. But in doing so they did not realize that they were on the wrong road and had to change.

    The result: Pakistan was soon being regarded as a 'terrorist state' with more than 80% of the global attacks being traced back to them. The Americans could not do anything. They could not attack Pakistan as it had got its own weapons of mass-destruction which ironically had been acquired by Pakistan as the US turned a blind eye to the Pakistani Nuclear Program.

    Now the Americans are in a tight spot. Years of bad foreign policy have come back to haunt them. The US does not have a clear way out to get out of this mess that they have got themselves in. All they can do is wait. Wait for the time to pass and for the region to become stable. Only then can they decide on their next course of action to deal with the 'Terrorist State'.

Asian Union- A Dream

Countries coming together and forming unions is not a new thing. It has happened in Europe. European countries came together to form the European Union. The same happened with Asia in 2002 when the Asian Cooperation Dialogue was formed. It is seen as a precursor to an Asian Union. However the possibility of a full fledged Asian Union similar to the European Union look grim.

Membership and Expansion of the Asian Cooperation Dialogue

Countries might join hands and come together to form an Asian UN of sorts but forming a European Union is a little far fledged thought. In Europe many countries have the same common currency and that is the Euro. In Asia this might happen only after 2-3 years but it will happen sooner rather than later. The reason behind this might be the growing Indo-Chinese influence. These two countries will be in a fierce competition with the United States for international say within the next 2-3 years. It has already started.

The common currency may come into existence but it won't be taken to a higher level the way it was taken to in Europe. This common currency might just be a commonality between a couple or more countries. But even the Euro started out as a common currency between some countries and then later went on to be the common currency of more that 27 nations. This might happen many years later but it will surely happen.

The Asian Union will help increase the trade between world's largest markets and that will do the Asian countries a lot of good. Such common things are needed by all the countries in Asia to grow. These commonalities are often the one's that bring people closer. Globalisation brought people closer because people in country wanted a good that was produced in another country.

Unity is what is needed to establish a common base for all the countries. This unity is a little hard to achieve a result of the numerous wars that were fought within this region. But people will surely get united one day. They will realise that the people living on the other side of the border are just like them and also live like them. This realisation will herald a new era in world politics.

The Complicated Indo-Sino Relationship Part III

India and China are two giants located in South East Asia. These two giants exercise a lot of power over Asia. They have had conflicting views but they have formed an alliance of sorts against the developed countries which want to impose their policies on the developing countries.

There are many issues which unite the two countries together. One of them is terrorism. Terrorism has targeted both the countries. Terrorists are pretty active in China which has resulted in the Chinese forming many policies. In the future also the fight against terrorism may continue and it will unite more and more countires together.

Energy is going to be a major problem in the future. This will lead to India and China collaborating in the field of energy and coming up with new technology. I have made this assumption based on the fact the two countires produce excellent scientists.

Diplomacy is a major issue which is going to affect world policy in the near future, or should I say that it has already started affecting it. India and China will come together to form a major front for the developing countries. This front will be extremely powerful as it would also involve countries like Brazil. This front will start wresting power from the developed countries and soon the world policies will favour the developing countries.

There many things that will  happen in the future. This topic of mine just dealt with some of these things that will be affecting India and China. I will soon start a parallel series that will deal about things that will happen in the future and that series will include countries and the state of technology.

The Complicated Indo-Sino Relationship Part II

The Indo-Sino relationship has been improving steadily but there are certain things that might become a hurdle in the near future. China as the world knows befriended Pakistan to counter the Indian influence. Now that such a lot of time has past, the two a become the closest of buddies. China won't go against Pakistan on any topic at the international level. And India and Pakistan don't have a great history together.


China's continued support to Pakistan might hinder this friendship process that has started between these two great nations. Pakistan which India believes sponsors terrorism and it does has many a times escaped thanks to the United States which has vested interests in that region or thanks to China which is its great ally.


Another issue that might cause misunderstanding between the two nations would be their stands on nuclear weapons. China has a huge arsenal and this is bound to make India uncomfortable. If such a thing ever happens then it might lead to a nuclear arms race which would be the worst thing to ever happen.

Influence is a major hurdle that separates these two countries from being big time allies. This has many a times happened between the US and UK but not to that serious an extent. However, India and China share borders. This is a major problem because if they didn't share borders and had been far  away from each other then their area of influence would not cross into the other's. But being neighbours, this is bound to happen. It is already HAPPENING.

TO BE CONTINUED...