India and China

A Himalayan rivalry


See article

Readers' comments



An enchanting article indeed.

First things first. China is a big brother in Asia and is much ahead of India on any count. The little good that India does in engaging China and others is 'inspite' of the government, more specifically congress govt's.

I like the aspect when the 'deal' was almost made to settle border issues when BJP was around. Come congress and the deal fell off. No surprises. Congress feigns under the cloak of 'balance' what in reality is 'indecisiveness' and lack of objectives (other than monarchial urges to see successive scions ascend the throne in Delhi). The same is portrayed as 'sage like' references to Singh. Everybody in the govt and on the street knows the real power centre is 10 janpath. Poor singh is a 'custodian' of prime ministership until Rahul is ready much like a 'escrow'.As the saying goes 'if one is not respected at home, he will not be respected outside of it'. China is smart to pick up that whiff.

Of the many failures of successive Indian governments (largely Congress and sporadically by others) the gaping one exposed here is the 'foreign policy'. I wonder why on earth the dept is called 'External affairs'. It has a very 'inside-out' view to it than 'outside-in'. For a country of India's size and location it cannot manage small countries like - bhutan, bangladesh, nepal etc etc. The large 'chest-beating' that India is a Super power is exxagerated to the moon. The iran pipeline fell-off, being chased out of Afghanistan, Nepal the only other 'hindu kingdom' is rules by Maoists, Srilanka kills thousands of tamils, bangladesh has too many refugees flowing into India and also a terrrorist harbor, Eternal pain Pakistan etc. For ties with Pakistan, the foreign ministry goofed up at Sharm-al-sheikh and also the infamous 'interlocutor' role for Saudia.

While India can estimate the risk of confrontation with China, China i believe is smarter. India is perenially on a 'poison-pill' strategy and will prove too much to bite for anyone incl China. In view of this i think China will appear to 'engage' India, keep it busy and do what it wants to further its interests.

That will be definition of the 'calm and friendly' relationship that these countries will settle into - China by 'design' and India by 'default'.

Also it will be nice will Economist can drop the 'Hindu Nationalist' prefix on BJP. On 2 counts. a) It has started to engage minorities (congress again benefitted the most by painting BJP anti-muslim) b)If it was really a party that represents 'Hindu's no other party can ever win in India. Hindus (atleast for now - notwithstanding the organic growth and inorganic growth by the other two popular world religions) should make more than 60% of population. It does not. India is more complicated than the bi-polar US or tri-polar UK.


It would be wise for India to learn what Dalai Lama is upto lest India lose what all it has built till date. For all the supposedly good work done by him, I see no real gains to Indians from his stay in the country. As a peace lover, he ought to help in settlement of all issues and provide pragmatic and practical solutions. He shouldnt be a reason for further disputes or sourness that adversely affects so many innocent peolpe

The Monpas are Tibetan Buddhists indeed and that is taken for granted, but, BUT, then so are, ARE, the Mongols-Mongolians, the Altaiy Mongols-Mongolians, the Tannu-Tuvans and the Turkic Altaiy Race, People and Nationality;

That does not, NOT, in any way make them, them the Monpas, as or any-more Tibetan as the Tibetans, or as the Bhutanese Tibetans or as the Sikkimese Bhutia Tibetans.

All of this mix-up alone only, ONLY, demonstrates the fact that, that in the and within the Territory of the North-East Frontier Agency, that the real and the true Indo-Hindustan-Indians are just as Alien as, as foreign as and as Outsider as, and no more indigenous than, the Han Chinese and the real and the true Chinese.

Tawang and the Monpas?!

The and these Affairs and Issues directly concerns, and directly concerns only, ONLY, the People's Popular Republic of China and India the Hindustan the Indo-Hindustan-Indian Union; and the and this Article should, shall and ought to had written as such.

The Dalai Lama, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama, and Both Their Persons, are, ARE, Alien persons that are not even Chinese Citizens nor Indo-Hindustan-Indian Citizens anyway and anyhow; so

So what is all these and that got to and have to do with Them and Them, in double plural and Capitalised?!

Where was the last registered Chinese address of Theirs after, AFTER, the year 1959?! What is Their Chinese Identity Card number?! And where are Their Blue, BLUE, and not Green, Indo-Hindustan-Indian Passports, and not, NOT, the Yellow Identity-Certificates or Certificates-of-Identity?! Do show and do tell!


Don't blame the concept of nation states. India and China existed peacefully for thousands of years because they were NOT neighbors. China became India's neighbor only in 1959 by forcefully occupying Tibet. Future Tibetan independence would bring peace between China and India.


This article is Exhibit A in what might be termed "British colonial phantom limb syndrome." Bill Emmott and his successors at the Economist are simply trying to relive the glory days of empire by egging on a fight between India, China, and Japan. His book, "Rivals," would be Exhibit B.

As pointed out by a previous commenter, China's natural cultural affinities lie toward its south and east, with countries such as Korea, Japan, and Vietnam. India actually has more in common with European countries, thus the term "Indo-European." What China and India share is a largely peaceful history of cultural interchange (witness Buddhism) and benign indifference abetted by the Himalayas.

That changed in the modern era when the greatest colonizers the world has ever known - the British - inserted themselves into the picture. The Younghusband invasion of Tibet via India in 1903 alerted the dying Qing dynasty to its vulnerability on the southern flank to British encroachment (as if the ceding of Hong Kong sixty years prior wasn't reminder enough). Colonial relics such as the McMahon line are further reminders of the malign British influence in that part of the world. The conflict between India and China in 1962 was simply a continuation of the turmoil initiated by British meddling.

Fast forward to the present day, where we have the British (this time thankfully from London, not Delhi) inviting more discord between India and China. What can I say? Once a troublemaker, always a troublemaker.

Hail Britannia!


This 4000km Border between China & India is A Fake One!

ALL Borders are Artificial & Man-Made!!

Peace, Love & Respect.


For Southeast Asia, an increased Indo-Chinese rivalry can be advantageous or detrimental:

* Advantageous because Southeast Asia is in a position, literally and figuratively, to serve as a middleman between South and (North) East Asia. And India and China are clearly the dominant members in those regions. The two giant neighbors suck in a lot of foreign investment that might otherwise have gone to Southeast Asia, but both are increasingly investing in and trading with Southeast Asia as well.

* I just hope that if India and China ever go to war, they are able to--and do--conduct it over the Himalayas, even with the altitude problems, and leave Southeast Asia alone. Many Southeast Asian states are in no position to get involved in a pan-Asian war, and I have little faith in the ARF's ability to prevent one. I do, however, have some faith in Southeast Asia's willingness to remain neutral so long as it is not pressured.


I'm deeply dismayed by the author's ignorance of the 1962 war by calling it an act of Chinese aggression. While it was strategically necessary for the Western governments to side with India and call China the aggressor during the Cold War, historians have long reached the consensus that the opposite is true.

Please read the authoritative treatment of the war by Neville Maxwell:

Observations of a former Australian diplomat:

And a research paper by the US Navy:


This "article" is so loaded with weasel words and loaded terms that if it was found in a Chinese newspaper, it would probably be called propaganda by Western readers. Take a look at this gem:

"India’s sage-like prime minister"

Also, the writer clearly favor India over China. While China is "suspicious" of American motives in Asia; India understandably "fears encirclement, and with reason". Maybe a little too obvious there eh?

Last, please stop the war-mongering. Every country have their differences, but when you want to "Forget Chindia", you directly play into the stereo type Chinese have of Westerns who wish to divide and conquer the developing nations.



Since as early as the Tang dynasty, the himalayas have been a influenced by Chinese culture. It is more akin to a buffer region that shares traits of both unique and rich cultures.



Let us be rid of the sentimental humbugs. China's cultural neighbours are Korea, Japan and Vietnam, not India. The Himalayas have always been a barren backwater of the Chinese civilization, and it had not belonged to China for too long.


India and China have coexisted peacefully as civilizations for millenia. The game changer in the 1940s was the emergence of both as nation-states. The essentially Western concept of a nation state is by definition more rigid, requiring undiluted loyalties and firm borders. Quite a difference from the amorphousness and fuzziness in play when civilizations interact.

It will be interesting if the leaderships of both countries come to realize that both the Indic and Chinese civilizations transcend borders, and have more in common than the West thinks or understands.



Products and events


Take our weekly news quiz to stay on top of the headlines

