Search

By conducting discourse analysis on Chinese textual materials around 1962, this paper tries to inductively explore the national identities of Chinese people during the 1962 Sino-Indian border conflict. It finds that China perceived itself as a persistent and resilient nation in the ongoing fight against invasion and oppression. The predominant social discourse around 1962 showed a strong enmity and resistance toward the imperialism which was then imposed on India. These national identities have formed a natural response as maintaining a tough stance toward incursion and repression, and have contributed to China's resolution to defense its territory with resorting to military force, even though it might not be beneficial in terms of diplomatic relations and economic interests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The growing India-Japan engagements are not only focused on economic issues, but also cover a wide range of interests, including regional security, political, and maritime security concerns. Both countries are consolidating strategic partnerships to address the risks and vulnerabilities posed by the evolving regional balance of power. Through their embeddedness with China, both India and Japan form an intrinsic part of the Indo-Pacific geopolitical security architecture. The key transformation of relations between these two states in the region is in response to the geopolitical change brought about by China's rapid ascension. In this regard, the article further explains how both countries are systematically strengthening a strategic partnership and gradually reinforcing economic, political, security, and strategic cooperation against China. This article seeks to address how both states would restrain rising China's strategic maneuvering in the Indo-Pacific region through an analysis of the India-Japan alignment, with the main focus of this study being on analyzing how both India and Japan are now investing in a long-term strategy to balance China's hegemonic policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Sino-Indian rivalry traces its origins to the founding of each state in the late 1940s. Over the past decade Indian concerns over Chinese activities in South Asia have significantly increased. While New Delhi has sought to counter Beijing in South Asia, a key question is to what extent has China responded to India in the same region? Do we find evidence of a tit-for-tat rivalry escalation process in South Asia where both China and India are actively trying to counter each other? The central argument in this article is that China is not actively engaging in a direct form of rivalry reciprocity with India. While certain activities by Beijing in the region are designed to enhance Chinese influence and power, there is less evidence that these are a direct response to India. This is in contrast to New Delhi's behavior in the region where we do find evidence of Indian leaders directly responding to China. This articles' main contribution is to demonstrate that maintenance in asymmetrical positional rivalries does not require clearly identifiable points of escalation, or follow a linear path of a tit-for-tat action-reaction cycle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

India and China are two powers in Asia, having common borders but different sense of entitlements and vulnerabilities. China's global profile has become much stronger than India's. How India and China deal with each other will determine peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region. The challenge for New Delhi is to factor its national self-interest and security into dealings with a rising China. India is threatened by Chinese assertiveness, given its outstanding boundary disputes with China, Belt and Road Initiative, uncritical Chinese support for Pakistan and China's increasing penetration into the Indian Ocean region. However, current Indian stance toward China is characterized by hedging, which has severe limitations dues to many structural constraints. The article argues that India should unhesitatingly increase its strategic engagement with America, Japan and Australia to strengthen the Quadrilateral. Despite some obvious differences, all four maritime democracies share a set of common strategic perceptions, which could deepen their security arrangements to manage China's growing assertiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, the authors conduct a comparative review of the strategic imperatives driving Sino-Indian policy on Afghanistan in the post-2014 scenario. The article argues that divergent strategic imperatives make cooperation difficult and/or unlikely. This analysis is based on a broader consideration of both contemporary history and geopolitical dynamics shaping the foreign policy considerations of these two countries, and an assessment of the impact of ongoing bi-lateral and regional aspirations. The authors begin by highlighting the salient dynamics that have historically characterized and driven Indian and Chinese foreign policy in general and on Afghanistan. They find that Afghanistan, although not a primary focus of either state’s foreign or security policy, historically, is increasing in importance for both; India and China compete on a range of economic and security issues. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article explores the global positions of China and India in merchandise trade. It first compares the integration models of China and India and, thereafter, examines the core factors that drive their trading relationships. With respect to their global trading partners, there are considerable differences in the influence of economic drivers of trade for China and India. Combined larger markets, similar consumer preferences, similar factor endowments and linguistic links enhance global exports from China. Alternatively, smaller market size, discrepancy in consumer demands, dissimilar factor endowments and combined stocks of foreign direct investments drive India’s global trade. The findings suggest that differences in the structure and demand of China vis-a-vis India dictate the divergence in the profile of their trade determinants. Such divergence in trade drivers, however, dissipates when taking into account Chinese and Indian partnerships on a regional basis – with East Asia, Middle East and North Africa (MENA), Latin America, European Union (EU), and Africa. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The simultaneous rise of China and India is one of the most important developments in contemporary world politics. Given their steadily growing power and aspirations and China’s more assertive posture in Asia, the management of China’s rise is one of the major challenges for India’s foreign policy. However, India is often said to have no guiding strategic framework for its China policy, which is seen as incoherent and reactive. This article, by contrast, shows that India has an evolving China strategy and that the alleged inconsistencies in India’s China policy are rather the result of an ambivalent image of China. Drawing on constructivism and discourse analysis, the article identifies the dominant perception of China in India’s foreign policy discourse and the resulting foreign policy strategy. In a next step, the article analyzes the China policy of the Congress-led UPA Government and investigates whether it conforms to the strategic policy frame of the dominant China discourse. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

After twenty years of economic reform and liberalization, is India now on pace to close the development gap with China? To assess this prospect, I analyzed multi-decade trends across six dimensions of human capabilities crucial to both individual and national development: 1) economic, 2) health, 3) infrastructure, 4) knowledge and technology, 5) public administration and 6) gender equality. I also conducted a focused comparison of two industrial sectors: software services and equipment manufacturing. The evidence shows that India is starting to catch up in several sectors, but overall China currently has a significant lead on most economic and technological indicators. Whereas most scholars studying this divergence have focused on shifting economic policies as the key to convergence, I argue that lingering development gaps may primarily be a result of India’s lower levels of social investment. Thus, if India is to catch up and surpass China, it will not only need supportive economic policies but must also concentrate heavily on expanding and improving rural infrastructure, education, and especially gender equality. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]