Almost all of what Saran says about China above can be said of India too:
.
[China’s pursuit of predominance at the top of the regional and global order, with the guarantee of order, has an unmistakable American flavour. It also echoes Confucius, who argued that harmony and hierarchy are intertwined.]
.
So, why is it so unacceptable for China to do the same-- Since Saran and other Indians seem happily accepting the US's "predominance at the top of the regional and global order"???
.
[China uses templates of the past as instruments of legitimisation, to construct a modern narrative of power. One key element of the narrative is that China’s role as Asia’s dominant power restores a position the nation occupied through most of history. The period from the mid-18th century until China’s liberation in 1949, when the country was reduced to semi-colonial status, subjected to invasions by imperialist powers and Japan, is characterised as an aberration. The tributary system is presented as artful statecraft evolved by China to manage interstate relationships in an asymmetrical world. What is rarely acknowledged is that China was a frequent tributary to keep marauding tribes at bay. The Tang emperor paid tribute to the Tibetans as well as to the fierce Xiongnu tribes to keep the peace.]
.
See how the Indians "characterised as an aberration" the colonization by the British Empire. Indian "political discourse seeks to project itself as a successor state entitled to territorial acquisitions" and "dominance of the British Empire":
.
'The problem is that India does not quite know its place. This makes sense when one considers its vision of its past and its expectations of its future. Independent India inherited the Raj’s armies -- the peacekeepers of Asia and Africa -- and with them, the Raj’s self-image as dominant east of Aden. It has always viewed itself as at least China’s equal in spite of the 1962 loss -- and even as its northern neighbor raced ahead economically. That was a minor setback, Indians feel; eventually we'll .. '
.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/view-indias-faceoff-with-china-in-sikkim-is-a-sign-of-the-future/articleshow/59692536.cms
.
Thus, India "uses templates of the past as instruments of legitimisation, to construct a modern narrative of power."
.
.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Nehrus-stubbornness-led-to-1962-war-with-China/articleshow/7125862.cms#ixzz18VgLUHko
.
'One report, citing a single anonymous source within the Chinese embassy in New Delhi, notes that the Chinese informed the Indians on June 1 that they would begin construction of a road in the area in June, with two weeks’ warning. That has not yet been reported anywhere, but would certainly highlight that India’s decision to act across the border was based on credible information of China’s intentions; it would also explain China’s extremely negative reaction in light of what Beijing might see as a good faith effort at notifying New Delhi before taking action. '
.
http://thediplomat.com/2017/07/whats-driving-the-india-china-standoff-at-doklam/
.
India can have "east of Aden" all it wants, but pls leave China out. "The problem is that China doesn't quite know its place" either!!! To be honest, I don't think Pakistan, Vietnam, the Koreas,... will "know their place" in front of the self-appointed (or is it British appointed?) "peacekeepers of Asia and Africa", that has grossly inflated its "self-image as dominant east of Aden".
.
Surprise, surprise! It turns out that India is not the ONLY country "east of Aden", that "does not quite know its place"!!! So, whom does India intends to keep in peace? Dear Great Leader Un Kim???
.
The real difference between India and China is that the former willingly submits itself to what it sees as the naturally superior White powers, AND sees other non-white countries, and peoples, as being inherently inferior not only to the white powers but also to India itself; whereas China sees to it that it is every country's own responsibility to put itself on the very top of the world order-- above the white powers even:
.
[Clint.Southwardin reply to L6QjhvJGVkJan 26th, 02:17
"The Chinese have been fed a myth that they are going to be the next superpower and the Middle Kingdom is going to be restored to its "natural" place - to its birthright."
.
This is what I said. "are going" is the same as "will" - future tense. Regardless of the debate about how you measure the size of economies hundreds of years (or even more than a thousand years ago) with little data available, and which side one falls on that debate, I was talking about Chinese expectations for themselves and the future, and what might happen if those expectations are thwarted, and they realize that recovering from the 19th century and the great leap backward is not going to be so emphatic as they had imagined.]
.
I have been watching this "feeding of a myth" thing for the past 2 decades. The "feeding" was done by Westerners. The Chinese always say that China is still a developing country, its people are still poor, its capabilities are limited, etc etc.
.
To the Chinese, there is nothing called "natural place" or "birthright". The Chinese believe that whatever you want to get, you must struggle for it and it is everyone's own responsibility to make it to the very top. Ditto for countries. This is a very destabilizing ideology-- For it not only means that the Chinese might one day challenge YOUR "modern world" which was made by YOUR "English speaking people", which is bad enough. This Chinese belief actually means that the Indians, Indonesians, Africans, Papua New Guineans too are entitled to put themselves at the very top of the international order-- As long as they work hard enough to get themselves there. Now, that would really flush YOUR "modern world" down the drain!!!
.
You don't seem to understand that the "modern world" is not your "English speaking people's" "birthright"! But then, what else can be your "expectations for yourselves"???
.
What you said above merely reflected your Anglo-Saxon mentality. I know because I spent more than a decade living in England. And YOU are the perfect embodiment of that mentality!}
.
[The belt and road also seeks to promote the notion that China through most of its history was the hub for trade and transport routes radiating across Central Asia to Europe, and across the seas to Southeast Asia, maritime Europe and even the eastern coast of Africa. China was among many nations that participated in a network of caravan and shipping routes crisscrossing the ancient landscape before the advent of European imperialism. Other great trading nations included the ancient Greeks and Persians, and later the Arabs. Much of the Silk Road trade was in the hands of the Sogdians who inhabited the oasis towns leading from India in the east and Persia in the west into western China.]
.
"The belt and road" is an admission that there was such a trade route that existed alongside others. That the "Greeks and Persians, and later the Arabs" had their "network of caravan and shipping routes crisscrossing the ancient landscape before the advent of European imperialism" does NOT preclude China having its own and certainly canNOT forbid China reviving, and extending, the ancient connections for the benefit of all future generations!!!
.
My advice to India is that, if it wants to play the game, it should create its OWN belt and road. It cannot make one out of jealousy against China's project.
.
.
Has Saran asked WHY "Western opinion does NOT concede to India the role of a predominant power"???
.
[However, in other metrics of power, with the exception of GDP, China lags behind the United States, which still leads in military capabilities and scientific and technological advancements.
.
In reality, neither Asia nor the world is China-centric. China may continue to expand its capabilities and may even become the most powerful country in the world. But the emerging world is likely to be home to a cluster of major powers, old and new.]
.
China KNOWS that very well. That is WHY China is exhorting itself to do better every new day so that it can play a more useful role in the coming Multi-Polar world.
.
[Any emerging and potentially threatening power will confront resistance. China, like other nations before it, cultivates an aura of overwhelming power and invincibility to prevent resistance.
.
Despite this, coalitions are forming in the region, with significant increases in military expenditures and security capabilities by Asia-Pacific countries.]
.
China seeks CO-operation with others. You can resist cooperation all you want. China will simply seek cooperation, and mutual benefit, with other partners.
.
Didn't some people greeted with glee at China having difficulty with the Sri Lankans in the port deal a few months ago? It turns out the the Sri Lanka needs the deal more than China does:
.
.
.
This is what I said. "are going" is the same as "will" - future tense. Regardless of the debate about how you measure the size of economies hundreds of years (or even more than a thousand years ago) with little data available, and which side one falls on that debate, I was talking about Chinese expectations for themselves and the future, and what might happen if those expectations are thwarted, and they realize that recovering from the 19th century and the great leap backward is not going to be so emphatic as they had imagined.]