Recently,China this new action why make India very nervous?
Recently, why does this new Chinese action make India nervous?
? Original title:Recently, why does this new Chinese action make India nervous?
Sometimes the spread is too big for India.
Wen | Lin Minwang Qiu Yong Zheng
The other day, the foreign ministers of China, Afghanistan and Pakistan held their first trilateral foreign ministerial dialog in Beijing.
At a press conference, the three sides expressed their commitment to strengthening ties with each other, deepening mutually beneficial cooperation, promoting connectivity under the "Belt and Road" framework, and combating all forms of terrorism without discrimination.
At the same time, China and Pakistan expressed their willingness to work together with Afghanistan to actively explore the extension of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor to Afghanistan in an appropriate manner, based on the principle of mutual benefit***win. And it is this point that touches the pain point of certain countries.
For example, some Indian media said, "China-Pakistan Economic Corridor plan to extend to Afghanistan makes India feel uneasy, which will allow China's power to further penetrate into Central Asia and connect South Asia," "China to further encircle India".
In response to such comments that China is "overextending itself", Foreign Minister Wang Yi also responded that the China-Afghanistan-Pakistan trilateral foreign ministerial dialogues do not seek to replace the existing mechanism, and do not target any party other than the three countries. China still advocates an "Arab-led and Arab-owned" reconciliation process
1
Afghanistan
The India Today website said the extension of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) to Afghanistan is a "Chinese-Pakistani saber-rattling, with an intention to reach India". ". There is a reason why India says this.
Over the years, India has embarked on an active foreign policy towards Afghanistan, and relations between the two countries have improved significantly. India has provided over $2 billion in post-war reconstruction assistance to Afghanistan; helped Afghanistan build infrastructure such as roads, power grids and healthcare, such as the international highway that stretches from the city of Deraram in Afghanistan's Herat province to the Iranian city of Zaraj, the Salam hydroelectric power plant that cost hundreds of millions of dollars, and Afghanistan's new $75 million parliament building, among others.
But the assistance provided by India is not "free".
For example, in the military, India requires the Afghan Defense Forces to receive comprehensive training from the Indian army, requiring officers to go to India for training, or let the Indian army come to Afghanistan. At the same time, so that the ADF "to assume due military responsibility", to put it bluntly, is the hope of training Afghanistan can be used as a future "strategy" of the "pawns", used to hold Pakistan's use. The government has also been working on the development of the country's military.
In the final analysis, India hopes to borrow Afghanistan, Iran (especially the port of Chabahar) bypassing Pakistan, the influence of deep into the Central Asian region. For example, India has just joined the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), also to use this platform in order to increase its presence in Central Asia. To this end, India has gone to great lengths to build a strategic highway in Afghanistan, infiltrating it quietly and painstakingly. Of course, part of it also stems from Pakistan's failure to handle its relations with Afghanistan, which also made short work of the borderline on a few occasions in 2016, turning Afghanistan more pro-India.
But sometimes the spread is too big for India.
While India boasts of its "South Asian hegemony", it is still struggling to build its own economy, not to mention assisting others. For example, in the construction of Afghanistan's "economic lifeline" Hindukush strategic highway, in addition to inefficiency, there is not enough money to complete the construction of the highway. At this time, Afghanistan proposed to introduce Chinese funds to participate in the construction of the highway, India firmly opposed.
So, it is not difficult to understand why Afghanistan turned to China.
On the one hand, development is the main theme, whether it is Afghanistan or Pakistan, have **** the same desire for economic development, and at the same time China has the economic strength to come up with the technology and capital; on the other hand, China and Afghanistan have always been close relations, in addition to China's advocacy of the "Afghan-led, Afghan-owned," not too involved in internal affairs, to a certain extent. The Chinese have always had a close relationship with Afghanistan, and China advocates "Afghan-led, Afghan-owned" and does not get too involved in internal affairs, which, to a certain extent, also makes Afghanistan more comfortable.
In this way, India, which has been planning to make plans in South Asia, has lost the strategic grip of Afghanistan to clamp down on Pakistan, so it can't be anxious.
Photo: Observer Network
2
Deep meaning
Perhaps everyone's impression of Afghanistan is simply stuck in the "Taliban" or the United States here for 16 years on the war. But in fact, the "tomb of the empire", the history of the British and Russian "Great Game" and the Cold War U.S. and Soviet Union in Afghanistan, seems to tell us that this place, chaos.
So why is China still "involved" in Afghanistan?
First of all, this will help China to fight against the "three forces", drug importation and other major problems. 28, terrorists launched a series of attacks on the Afghan capital, resulting in at least 41 deaths and 84 injuries, and the "Islamic State" later declared responsible for the attacks. The Islamic State subsequently claimed responsibility for the attacks. In the face of the return of terrorists, it can be said that no country in the world is completely safe. To combat terrorism, China needs the cooperation of Afghanistan and Pakistan to strengthen counter-terrorism intelligence cooperation and to keep terrorists out of the country.
Secondly, the most important thing is to help promote the "One Belt, One Road" initiative. In particular, as the flagship project of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, after all, Afghanistan is the "Silk Road Economic Belt" must pass through. In Afghanistan, China has huge investments in resources, such as the Enak copper mine project and the Amu Darya Basin oil field project, but it has been difficult to move forward because of internal security problems.
And, China is the best person to solve the Afghan problem, and only China has the ability and possibility to do so.
China's position on the Afghan issue has always been rather unconventional, practicing the principle of non-interference in internal affairs and maintaining friendly relations with all Afghan factions. This role of China is irreplaceable by other countries. In contrast, the United States, India and Pakistan are all directly related to the Afghan issue, and any party's gains, or changes in the relationship between the parties, may cause countermeasures by other countries in the region.
Since the 18th National Congress, the biggest change in China's diplomacy in the neighborhood is to "strategize the neighborhood" and "shape the neighborhood". In other words, China has to have its own future planning for the future environment of the neighborhood, thinking not about how to adapt to the current environmental changes, but actively shaping the development trend in the next 5-10 years.
So the role played by the Chinese side is more like an "intermediary", using their own "contacts" with the parties to build a platform for the parties to talk to each other and provide the convenience of dialogue. Whether it is Pakistan or Afghanistan, have a **** the same will, is the development of the economy, which is the Pakistan-Afghanistan to abandon the strife, the basis of peace and coexistence. And China's Belt and Road Initiative is just right to greatly improve the economic level of the two places.
Why wouldn't China be happy with this kind of "beauty for all, beauty for all***"?
Foreign Minister Wang Yi, Afghan Foreign Minister Rabbani (left), Pakistani Foreign Minister Asif (right)
3
India is very anxious
In fact, India's opposition to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is mainly motivated by anxiety about China's "One Belt, One Road". After all, South Asia and the Indian Ocean as their own "backyard" of India, do not want others easily "finger" their own territory.
Take a look at India's official stance. In May this year, India's foreign ministry spokesman said, connectivity initiatives must be built on the basis of recognized international norms, good governance, rule of law, openness, transparency and equality, alluding to the existence of the "Belt and Road" above these issues; and openly opposed to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, saying that no country can accept a project that ignores the core concerns of its sovereignty and territorial integrity. The project has been a major source of concern for India.
India's leading China expert Xie Gang said China's "One Belt, One Road" is aimed at constructing a China-centered global order (Sino-centric global order). But now, as China pushes forward with the construction of the "Belt and Road", China will seize India's development space.
For example, India is concerned about the project's passage through Kashmir, a region it considers its own. Indian media reported that India has been strongly opposed to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor through Kashmir, but China has been trying to invite other countries to cooperate.
To this, Foreign Minister Wang Yi responded, "The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor is an economic cooperation project and should not be politicized. The corridor has no relationship with existing disputes in the region, including territorial disputes, nor should it."
China has been releasing goodwill towards India's "nonsense". "The purpose of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor is not to target a third party, but at the same time, it is hoped that it will benefit the third party and the whole region, and become an important driving force for regional integration."
Chinese officials have also repeatedly publicly explained that the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor is a livelihood project, China has no intention to intervene in the dispute over Indo-Pakistani Kashmir, and there is no change in China's policy on Kashmir, which can be considered as an extension of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor to India, connecting it with the Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar Economic Corridor as well as the India's North-South Economic Corridor, and the India's "Monsoon Project India's "Monsoon Project" and "Spice Route" can be connected to the "Belt and Road" and so on.
However, China's stance does not seem to be acceptable to India. India has also been playing a pioneering role in resisting China's "Belt and Road".
Recently, for example, India, the United States and Japan*** resisted the inclusion of the "Belt and Road" in the United Nations resolution. In fact, it was Modi's visit to Washington in June to seek US support for his position on the Belt and Road that led to US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson calling the Belt and Road a "predatory economy". "
4
4
Embarrassment
India's resistance has also made it somewhat of an embarrassment to regional multilateral organizations.
Look at an example.
In the Joint Statement of the 16th meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) member states held in Sochi this year, there is a clause which says that six countries, including Pakistan, the Islamic ****nation of Pakistan and the Russian Federation, have reaffirmed their support for the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) proposed by China. It is noteworthy that India is the only one of the eight full members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) that has been excluded from the joint statement.
Now, the UK, France, Germany, Russia and many international institutions, have either directly or indirectly sought to join the construction of the economic corridor. in September 2016, Iranian President Rouhani even directly asked Sharif to join the corridor (a week ago, Uncle Island happened to be in Islamabad to attend the China-Pakistan-Iran trilateral meeting on the construction of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) on the second track).
With Afghanistan joining, I believe more and more countries and organizations will participate in the construction of the "Belt and Road" in the future. With such a trend, India, how are you going to face it?
Expanded reading
India has annexed hundreds of "small countries", but because of a "hard core" today still fights to the death...
On December 23 and 24, local time, the disputed Kashmir, India, Pakistan in the fierce exchange of fire here for several days and caused casualties.
On the evening of Dec. 24, The Hindu called for reconciliation between India and Pakistan, saying it was "time to break the ice."
But how easy is it to break the ice after decades of feuding?
Three months ago, the Indian government released the latest figures on the Indo-Pakistani border in Kashmir, showing that 41,000 people have died in Kashmir in the past 27 years due to the war - an average of four lives lost every day in the fighting.
South Asia has become a veritable "powder keg" with Kashmir at the center of the conflict.
The roots of the Kashmir issue are much older than a few decades, and it is in fact an intractable proposition left over from the long history of South Asia and the many "messes" made during the partition of India and Pakistan.
Wen | Xu Cong瞭望智库特约历史观察员
本文为瞭望智库原创文章，如需转载请在文前注明来源瞭望智库(zhczyj)及作者信息，否则将严格追究法律责任。
1
Hyderabad, the world's richest man, has been snatched by India!
Mir Osman Ali Khan, the name may be unfamiliar to most people.
But in the 1930s and 1940s, this gentleman was a world-renowned figure: on February 22, 1937, he appeared on the cover of Time magazine in the United States.
Ali Khan on the cover of Time
Why was he so influential?
Because he was the "richest man in the world" at the time.
Ali Khan's hands in a large amount of gold, jewelry, it is said that he owns all the jewelry can be linked together around London's Piccadilly Circus a week;
He used old newspapers wrapped as a paperweight with diamonds than the King's Crown that is heavier than that one!
......
But it would be naive to think that all this gold and jewels is all Ali Khan has - the rich man also has a vast "country"! "
This piece of land across the south-central South Asian subcontinent, called Hyderabad, a territory of 213,000 square kilometers, larger than England and Scotland combined, but also larger than today's India-Pakistan area of actual control of Kashmir combined;
It is a very important location, Hyderabad superimposed on today's map of India can be found that it is really long in India's "
Hyderabad is also characterized by the fact that the ruling class, represented by the monarch Ali Khan, is Muslim, but the vast majority of the inhabitants of the territory are Hindus.
Without it, today's India would be a "hollow" territory
India, which had just gained its independence, could not sit still: how could it allow others to snore in its bed?
So, in a bold move, India "demanded" that Hyderabad be "incorporated" into India.
Naturally, Ali Khan, a Muslim, refused to accept this, wanting to remain independent and even join Pakistan.
After repeated attempts at "persuasion" failed, India finally bared its fangs.
On September 13, 1948, the Indian army directly invaded Hyderabad.
Ali Khan's immense wealth could not reverse the disparity in power between the two sides, and the Hyderabad army was forced to surrender after five days of resistance.
Hyderabad was thus annexed by India, and only then did the map of contemporary India take shape.
2
India: How can I always be on my side of the bed ......
Pakistan: Shut up! How is it that I can always hear you snoring on my side of the couch?!!!
Hyderabad and the famous Kashmir are both known as "Turkish states".
India, Pakistan and the Tirthankars were originally colonized by the British Empire.
When the British left, they agreed to a "partition" of India and Pakistan, with the "native states" having the choice of joining India or Pakistan, or choosing independence.
As a result, by the time India and Pakistan became independent, there were still nearly 600 states on the South Asian subcontinent, more than 550 of which were in India.
But, after all, the scenario given by the British was only a theoretical principle, and the reality of geo-factors played a much bigger role.
The states of India and Pakistan, which are dotted across the territories of the two countries, have had the good sense to "take the initiative" and merge with India or Pakistan.
The two largest states in South Asia - Hyderabad and Kashmir - are among the few that "refused to comply with the order" of the "hard".
Kashmir's ruler, Hari Singh, is a Hindu, but 3/4 of its population is Muslim.
Pakistan will not turn a blind eye to India's frenzied annexation of its territory: if you can't sleep on your side of the bed, can I sleep on mine?
Kashmir for Pakistan, compared to Hyderabad for India, to be much trickier.
Pakistan, eager to have Kashmir in its pocket, scared Singh, the monarch of the Turkish state, who chose to take the initiative to invest in India in exchange for its support by force.
India is happy to "insert a bar". Neither side gave in easily, and a protracted conflict erupted.
The biggest dispute in contemporary South Asia exists in this "last big state", which is also the India-Pakistan partition program in the unclear rules of disposal of the state of a microcosm of the evil consequences.
The problem of Tirthankar is not a new one, but its history goes back further in time ......
3
Where did the "Hyderabad and Kashmiris" come from?
The Himalaya separates two worlds in a single mountain.
China on this side of the mountain, since the Qin unified the six countries, the concept of "unification" is y rooted in people's hearts, although the history of war and division, but ultimately inevitable towards unification, this tradition has continued for more than two thousand years.
The South Asian subcontinent, on the other side of the mountain, has basically been in a state of statehood since ancient times, and has never achieved true unity, nor has there ever been a central dynasty ruling the entire country, even during the unprecedentedly powerful Ashoka period.
Conquistadors from Central and Southwest Asia came to the plains of India again and again, establishing a great variety of feudal states.
This characterization became even more pronounced during the Mughal Empire before the invasion of European colonizers.
The Mughal Empire, a new state built by the Turkicized Islamic Mongols on the South Asian subcontinent, was the "sequel" to the Timurid Mongol Empire ("Mughal" is actually the word for ("Mughal" is actually the phonetic translation of "Mongolia"). At the same time, it was the meeting point of the Islamic and Hindu cultures.
Note: The Mughal Empire began in 1526 and ended in 1858, ruling for 331 years. in 1857, Bahadur, the last monarch of the Mughal Empire, took part in the Great Uprising against the British, and after his defeat, he was banished by the British colonial authorities to Rangoon, Burma, where the last dynasty of India, the Mughal Dynasty, perished.
The Mughal Empire planted the seeds of the Tupang problem in South Asia.
Since its inception, the Mughal Empire was a confederate state, with a large number of meritorious aristocrats and local governors and princes enjoying a great deal of autonomy.
In the early days of the empire, the emperor could still rely on his personal authority and strict laws to restrain the localities; later, the monarch's control over the localities gradually weakened, and the princes, nobles or tribal leaders gradually transformed the territories, which were originally conditional on the performance of military service, and which were obtained by feudalization and could not be hereditary, into hereditary feudal territories by trickery and by force.
During the reign of the sixth emperor, Aurangzeb (1658--1707), the Mughal empire reached its zenith, encompassing a part of present-day Afghanistan, Kashmir, Pakistan, and most of India.
However, the empire, which seemed to be at its height, was weak on the outside - the wars had drained the empire, and the prolonged fighting in the south had weakened Aurangzeb's control over the north, and the great nobles had taken up arms and made themselves independent.
Aurangzeb's policy of religious persecution and the imposition of heavy taxes on non-Muslims further divided the country.
By the time of his death, Aurangzeb was left with a divided empire.
After the 18th century, as the empire declined, provincial governors and local Islamic and Hindu feudal lords took advantage of the situation to set up their own armies, and it was at this time that the Tirthankar kingdoms of varying sizes were formed across India.
As Marx commented:
"The supreme power of the Great Mughal was destroyed by his governors, the power of the governors was destroyed by the Marathas, the power of the Marathas was destroyed by the Afghans; and in the midst of all this confusion, the Britons broke in and conquered them all. This is a country where there is not only the antagonism of the Mohammedans and the Hindus, but also the antagonism of tribes and tribes, of castes and castes, a society built upon a parity of power created by a generalized mutual exclusiveness and an innate exclusionary ideology among all its members. Is not such a state, such a society, destined to be the spoils of the conqueror?"
4
The "Two Indias" under Victoria's Crown
In 1857, the Mughal dynasty fell, and India formally entered the period of British colonial rule.
The British established the British "Indian Empire" in South Asia, which was only a conceptualization of "India" as a country.
This "country" was full of devastation: within the "national boundaries", there were nearly 600 states of varying sizes and fragmentation.
All of them together covered an area of 5 million square miles, or 45.3% of the total area of British-ruled South Asia, and had a population of 86 million, or one-third of the total population of the region at that time.
Many of the princes and kings of the Tukpangs warmly welcomed the arrival of the British, and fought for the British on the battlefields, reserving their thrones on the premise that the British monarch was to be recognized.
The princes of the native states and the British Empire signed a treaty confirming the above principles, accepting the monarchical status of the King of England and Emperor of India, and agreeing that the Vice-King (Viceroy) would control their foreign and defense powers.
In exchange, Britain guaranteed the princes the right to autonomy in their internal affairs, and the large and powerful native states like Hyderabad had their own currency, mint, railroads and post offices.
Note: After the creation of the Indian Empire in 1858, the title of Viceroy was added to the British Governor-General in India. This distinctive title emphasized the importance and special nature of India to the British Empire.
In 1877, Queen Victoria was crowned Queen of India
So, in South Asia under British rule, there were in fact "two Indias":
One was the capital city of Calcutta (1858-1911) and the other was Delhi (1911-1947).
One was India with Calcutta (1858-1911) and Delhi (1911-1947) as its capitals and provinces as its center, called British India (or "Indian Empire"), which was directly ruled by the British;
The other was India with 565 provinces and provinces, called the "Indian Empire".
The other was India, which consisted of 565 feudal territories of the princes of the Indian states, called "Indian states" (Princely State), governed by the princes of the states, with the British colonizers operating behind the scenes.
As late as 1888, a senior British official in India said, "There is not, nor has there ever been, an India. India has never even had a nation in the European mind, that is to say, a nation with unity in its national, political, social and religious aspects. To think that India can become a nation is as whimsical as expecting that in the future the nations of Europe will be replaced by a single nation."
British India and the Indian state of Tudor, though both having the British king as their supreme head, are two different political entities. A state within a state may not be unusual, but the existence of so many disjointed "states" within one "state" is a curious phenomenon.
The princes of Tupang had different titles such as Maharaja, Raja, Maharaja, Nawab and Nizam.
Note: Those known as Maharaja or Raja were generally Hindu or Sikh feudal lords;
those known as Nawab were originally the governors of the Mughal empire assigned to the larger provinces;
those known as Nizam were originally provincial officials assigned by the central government (who became the (who later became the supreme governor with real power in the province).
Both the Nawab and the Nizam were Muslims.
The Nizam of Hyderabad and the Maharaja of Kashmir ruled territories and populations comparable to those of the largest European states. The princes of the island of Kathiawar, on the shores of the Sea of Oman, live in dilapidated stables and govern a territory just slightly larger than a district. The four hundred-odd tuktuks cover no more than thirty square kilometers.
Nehru, in his book The Discovery of India, noted, "Fifteen of these may be considered as the principal native states. The largest are Hyderabad, Kashmir, Mysore, Travancore, Baroda, Gwalior, Indore, Cochin, Jaipur, Jodhpur, Bijaner, Bhopal and Patiala. This is followed by many medium-sized states, and finally by hundreds of very small districts, some of which are no bigger than the tip of a pin on a map. Most of these small states are in the Ghati