China did not exploiter the Africa, but win on both side. China had wave some fund to them in difficulty. Not the like the US and Europe had done suck a lot of resource from Africa, no benefit to African at all. Listen to professor Lumumba said.
We can begin our relationship with China by exchanging at cultural levels. Our Indian media should cease immediately to use detrimental terminology to create hatred, anxiety, fear, etc between the 2 nations. Both of us are great civilisations & neighbours; even if we cannot be friends we should not be enemies unnecessarily. Let us be neighbours who accept & respect each other.
India likes to compare with China, well if it is mean as aspirations then it is good, but if it is for bad-mouthing China and or thinking India has somewhat reached the level of what China is today, then it is laughable because India is several decades behind China as at now.
As a Chinese, I have never been to India. But I heard a lot of lectures in RU-vidr by India people. I was impressed by them. In the height of spiritual and thinking, I think India is far higher than China.
QUAD is nothing because US, Japan, and Australia are existing allies, with addition of India. US wants cannon fodders to do its dirty work. another point is after a decade of Pivot to Asia, is that the best US can come up with?
INDIA IS JUST A OBEDIENT HOUSE SERVANT FOR THE REST OF THE QUAD MEMBERS HAS TO DO AND SAY WHATEVER THEIR ANGLO COLONIAL MASTERS TELL THEM EVERYONE KNOWS THIS
sadly this doesn't cover much about India. I once read an Indian guru argument against industrialization, which he felt correctly so that the introduction of robotic and machinary would remove jobs for the Indian poor and widen the wealth inequality in India. but it is also because there are so many competiting idea for and against development that is causing India to be stagnant, if different forces in India pull India in different direction, it would simply not move. yes Indian can survive chaos and a wide varieties of Ideas, but just as we see liberalism in US, it could lead to polarization and disunity and the government going in circle to try and find a balancing point. we should not confused natural preferrence with what is good for a country. sure US prefers to be an empire but is that really good for the american people? US still fight between globalization and protectionism. likewise India still fight between the interest of the poor farmers and that of the rich industrialist, like the real reason why India did not sign the RCEP is not because of "China", it because the Indian government knew what opening up trade would do to the Indian farmers, India would be flooded with cheap food grew from industrialised farming that the poor Indian farmer could never hope to compete with, high tech product is not what scares India since India doesn't depend on that to begin with, is the commodities goods that sustain alot of poor Indian that is far more scary. and we need to have that serious conversation. it was disappointing that Australia refuse to give India an exception on food product that lead to the collapse of talk on RCEP, which I always feel was a mistake by Australia because now we are in an RCEP with no India. of course Indian government can't blame Australia, so they pretend it because of China, but China was never an economic threat to India.
These are all nutty Chinese talking points. The PRC had no issue liberalizing its farming sector and allowing massive imports of products from latin America. It recognized that there needed to be a shift from agricultural to industrial labor and subsidized the latter accordingly. Rich industrialists were the core of their economic development.
For whatever God's sake please don't compare India with China. India is several decades behind China in almost all sectors. Unless China's progress has been halted, which is highly unlikely, for India to catch up with China may take 50 years.
"Unless China's progress has been halted, which is highly unlikely" - China's economic slowdown has started. It's clear as a day and markets have started reacting to it. What's highly likely is China would grow at sub-4% this decade and sub-3% in the next decade. That means at max a 35T USD economy in 20 years. That's assuming supply chains don't significantly shift out of China and China still has access to western markets. And India doesn't need to economically "catch up" with China to achieve it's geopolitical goals.
@@arunsar7893 Are you getting all the info from WhatsApp or west msm? China's growth in high 5% which is good for economy of almost 20 tr$. Now China is transitioning towards high tech economy and there is vast area to grow. Chinese companies are competing with the world and making big strides. Can you tell me which India's company compete in the world stage?
I appreciate the opinion of this Indian diplomat regarding China. I must say he is knowledgeable and objective in discussing China's strengths and Weaknesses and don't present the usual western narrative about China.
When China was so poor, of course they have to adjust to nature. Now they are a bit better, of course they don't need to adjust as much. That's just part of the progress
As stated by Mr. Gokhale, "Central Bank Digital Currency" is vital. India needs to move as fast as possible towards its implementation. Blockchain based CBDC is the next level of efficiency even in Direct Benefits Transfer.
The logic behind BRI seems to be that Infrastructure contributed 2-3% to Chinese economy over 2-3 decades. Since scope for further infrastructure in China has dwindled they would like to get extra 2% from infrastructure with investments in other countries. In construction stage the countries get nothing as the finance, manpower, equipment, materials is all Chinese
Other countries benefit from the excess capacity of China, experienced skilled manpowers, spare heavy machineries, excess monetary from trade surpluses and established suppliers. China is offering a less painful path that they have already hacked.
Well, in most developing countries, they really don't have skill labour, advanced machineries, quality materials n finance. But still, China has been trading local people to do some if these works wherever possible as cost of Chinese workers are much higher now
China sells the narrative that once infrastructure is in place industry and trade will boom. This does not happen. CPEC is an good example. Building a road or railway will not lead to an economic boom. By the time construction is completed China taken back all the loan amount as payment for equipment, manpower which all come from China. The host country is left struggling to pay back the interest (usually very high) and capital. That is how the debt becomes a trap
@@teogeorge2203 The business should generate enough revenue for debt servicing and maintainable at least in initial year and then generate surplus after time. Not so with CPEC or any Chinese project.
Infrastructure give economic boom or not depend on the usage. Right infrastructure definitely increases productivity. If not, one can choose back to live in the clave, refuse to use electricity and phone.
