China’s Diplomatic Folly
The East Asian Summit was a rude awakening, for not one country spoke up on behalf of China on the issue of disputes in the South China Sea.
- R. S. Kalha
- November 23, 2011
The East Asia Centre is dedicated to study and research the domestic and foreign policies of individual countries of the region as well as India’s multifaceted relationships with these countries. With respect to China, the Centre’s research foci are its foreign policy (particularly towards the US, Russia, Central Asia and Asia Pacific), domestic politics, economy, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) and India’s relationship with China in all its dimensions. The Centre’s research also focuses on Taiwan, its domestic politics, Sino-Taiwanese relationship and Indo-Taiwanese relationship, Hong Kong and India-Hong Kong relations. Japan and Korea are the other major focus of the Centre, with its research focused on their domestic politics, foreign policy and comprehensive bilateral relationships with India. The geopolitics of the Asia Pacific and the Korean peninsula are also studied in the Centre.
The centre brings out five monthly newsletters: East Asia Military Monitor, Japan Digest, China Science and Technology, Korea Newsletter, and China Military Digest.
No posts of Books and Monograph.
No posts of Jounral.
The East Asian Summit was a rude awakening, for not one country spoke up on behalf of China on the issue of disputes in the South China Sea.
There certainly exists some logic behind India, Japan and the US working together, and that too in a region that lacks solid security architecture.
Not engaging North Korea is no more seen as an option even as it continue to build its nuclear capabilities.
It is apparent that both Russia and North Korea are seeking diplomatic currency. But so long as North Korea’s nuclear weapons programme remains an unresolved issue, Russia’s plan for a trans-Korean gas pipeline, however mutually beneficial that may be, is likely to remain unachievable.
There is considerable interest in a possible conflict with China. However, little discussion exists in the open domain on conflict possibilities. This Brief attempts to fill this gap by dilating upon conflict scenarios along the spectrum of conflict. It brings out the need for limitation to conflict and the necessity for a grand strategic approach towards China as against a military driven one.
This commentary analyses the implications of the growing Chinese footprint in India’s North West region, particularly in Northern Afghanistan and Pakistan occupied Kashmir.
The publication in the Global Times of two very contradictory articles on the same day on the South China Sea dispute clearly underlines the fact that the Chinese leadership is divided.
No party to the dispute, including China, has thus far challenged the principle of freedom of navigation for global trade through the South China Sea.
With 120 members belonging to his faction, Ozawa still wields decisive influence to make or unmake the government led by the DPJ.
Competing claims and reports of oil and gas rich fields in the South China Sea have woven a complicated web affecting the maritime security environment.