LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the Times of India says China's new border law that goes into effect on Jan 1, 2022, aims to tighten control over border areas, with strengthening of border defenses and integration of border populations. It says this means border relations will not be affected by improvements in bilateral relations. China is rejecting the Indian position for border standoffs to be settled through improvements in bilateral relations in other areas. The Times Editorial says that an "aggressive, inflexible, belligerent China" is what India now faces. 

LyrArc Article Gist
Indian security officials say Chinese troops have moved back several miles at 3 disputed border patrol points in one of the Himalayan areas. Reduction is not substantial but it shows intent of the two armies said the official cited in the WSJ report. China also removed two dozen armored vehicles. India has also withdrawn some of its vehicles and troops from the front lines. This is after the two sides met for de-escalating tensions. In 2017 for 2 months there was a standoff in  a stretch of land near Bhutan. This one is near Ladakh region in the high Himalayan mountains. The border is 2000 miles long in the mountains of Tibet, Ladakh, Bhutan. This one was near the Pangong Tso lake which is pictured in the WSJ report at a high altitude. India has tried to match Chinese road building and infrastructure efforts in the area in recent years.

LyrArc Article Gist
India's statement in the border dispute with China in the Doklam region, says that the road building activity by China would significantly alter the status quo with security implications. India's foreign ministry adds that the situation in the six week standoff remains unchanged. The Indian statement also said that future bilateral relations with China would require peaceful relations in the border regions.

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the Hindusthan Times compares the relatively few comments from India's Ministry of External Affairs on the Dokalam standoff between India and China, and the frequent and patriotic comments from the state media in China. India took a firm position on the sensitive border area road construction by China, because the Doklam plateau is the narrow area in the mountains that allows entry to India's northern plains. India and China announced disengagement following the incident. This report points out that the resolution happened on the eve of a BRICS meeting in China. Indian prime minister Modi's absence from the BRIC's meeting would have been an embarrassment for China, says the Hindusthan Times. The resolution would have happened after both sides realized that the border issue escalation was not in the interest of China and India as both sides face more important issues- India in the focus on modernization and China on sustaining growth and maintaining trade relations with the U.S. Trump administration at a time when the debt to GDP ratios exceed by some estimates 280% and trade has become a sensitive issue in America's midwestern states. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
After a weeks long standoff both sides disengage expeditiously in the India's border dispute with China over construction of a road in the Doklam plateau region of Bhutan. In this NYT report experts in Hong Kong point out that it is not in China's economic interest with an aging population and debt crisis, tense economic relations with the U.S., and for India struggling with modernization issues, to turn a remote border issue into an open conflict. It would also complicate relations in the Asian region with Japan and economic relations with the U.S, countries with whom China's economy is intertwined through supply chains and other ways. Disputes with China and South Korea have in the past affected the Chinese economy, and China has developed trade with India as its companies look for growing markets. India's Modi administration is focussed on the economy. In this context of broader relations the road construction in Doklam appears to be an aberration that is hard to explain except as a miscalculation and poor understanding of the best interests of the region and of the world.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
It is shocking to see the virtual lack of cultural or other people to people contacts between the two largest regions in Asia, and most populous regions in the world, India and China. There appears to be a near total lack of understanding on both sides at the university and government level of the importance of setting up these contacts, so that misperceptions do not exist on either side and better relations can be built using such contacts. Rana Mitter, a expert on Modern China at Oxford University, says in an interview in the Times of India, that India and the 1962 conflict occupy less attention in the Chinese mind because other issues such as the relations with the U.S., ASEAN and Japan, take up more space. Mitter says India should emphasize its pluralism, democracy, and peaceful engagement in its external relations.  Mitter puts less emphasis on the 50 day standoff between India and China on the border at Doklam, Bhutan region, when he responds to a question about the risks of a conflict. He points to a bigger problem that affects relations between the two countries- the lack of exchanges that bring Chinese students, faculty, and government personnel to India, the difficulty of obtaining visas. This lack of cultural exchanges between the two countries is a major issue, considering also that trade and business exchanges are taking place and growing during this lack of cultural exchanges.  As a result it appears that business and economic relations guide the China-India relationship today, with people in China's key ministries and government, in universities and local government, lacking an understanding of India. Mitter makes this clear that cultural exchanges need to be established. Even a search for China- India dialogue brings up little information with a location in Beijing but none in India. It is mind boggling that the relations between the two most populous regions in the world are based on a huge lack of contacts and exchanges that would improve perceptions and understanding.  Britain's effort offers a model to follow as Tsinghua University in Beijing, as part of China's C9, has set up cultural exchanges with British universities in the ongoing cultural exchanges between Britain and China. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A major shift in foreign investment may be taking place as the 2014 St. Petersburg International Economic Forum takes place in May 2014. Russian policy in Ukraine and tensions with the U.S. and Germany could lead to a shift in investment to other emerging market countries. China's tensions with Japan could lead to a similiar shift of Japanese foreign investment. At the same time India has elected a new government with an absolute majority and an overwhelming mandate from young people to accelerate development. The new government under the BJP party's Modi has a decade of experience attracting foreign investment in western India. Indonesia, Vietnam, Africa and other emerging market countries, could benefit from the shift in investment. Investment could also return to the home countries with lower labor costs in Southern Europe, lower labor/energy/transport costs in North America. For Russia the debate at the St Petersburg Economic Forum was about pursuing one of three policy paths with some riskier than others, or some combination also risky and uncertain- depending on state banks and oil windfall funds, increasing ties with Asian countries, continuing on the current path with lower foreign investment and continued capital outflows. The failure to use the time wisely to diversify the oil based economy which could have been better accomplished in an economy not overly dependent on crony capitalism and centralized economy, both current characteristics, will affect future progress. A key weakness for Russia compared to China is the centralization under one person Putin, more so in the third term. In China the two man team Keqiang and Jinping is part of a larger team chosen by consensus and negotiation and part of a rotational scheme. It has senior leaders who initiated the changes to a market driven economy in the nineties determined to see China on track....

LyrArc Article Gist
Manuel Barroso, president of the European Commission, tells Italian newspaper La Repubblica on September 1, 2014, that Russian president Putin made some abnormal remarks in a phone conversation. Responding to Barroso's question about whether Russian troops had crossed into eastern Ukraine, Putin is reported to say: "That is not the question... But if I wanted to, I could take Kiev in two weeks." The WSJ editorial on September 3 referred to an earlier editorial on "Putin Bonaparte," giving some idea of how such comments by Putin are seen in the media, and how Putin's actions in Ukraine are creating new tensions with the NATO alliance and the U.S.