Glaring omission

China, ever since grabbing global headlines, has become arrogant towards all her neighbours. With Japan, it wants to settle second world war score, India it wants to teach 1962 lesson again, Taiwan it is hopeful, will peacefully return to the fold. Probably waiting for the current Dalai Lama to run his course, before forcing a change in Tibet.

So yes Obama is on a right course, to convey a not so subtle message.
And democracy alone provides governance thru consensus of those being governed. Not a bad thing, i suppose.

I have always pleaded for democratic alliances. In Democracies of Unfreedom: India and US (1996), I argued for an enduring, principled democratic relationship between the two greatest democracies. China’s role in Asia is perplexing. Its insatiable territorial claims all over do not behoove its rising international status. Pakistan and Myanmar, two of South Asian client (failed?) states, have obliged China at India’s expense. This is a cunning neighborliness. The world will have to watch.

The Asia tour has given Obama a respite from national politics. We need US to convey the kind of messages that he did in India and Indonesia. I was wondering whether he should be travelling a bit more, because he has performed all the right moves to restore US credibility in Asia. China is the world's bully now, and only USA can do something remotely effective in that respect. And as usual his speeches were a pleasure to hear - he even managed to convey his displeasure with india's reaction or no-reaction to Myanmar elections in his address to the joint session of parliament. Good going Obama!

I agree taht the US is trying to maintain a balance of power. The threat of China to her international statu is explicit. The US is trying to extent her influence in Asia with a view to containing the rise of China, and strive up some tension in Asia. As a result, she can collect the fruit in this situation.

On the other hand, I don't think the Asian countries will sincerely cooperate with the US. Although the rise of China will affetc the economy, they will need the Chinese commitment in the developing of the whole Asian region. The Asian countries want to have a greater influence in the world politics and counterbalance the influence of the west. So the US's action may implicitly stregthen the getermination for certain Asian countries to fight again the Western influence.

Well, it was a story on US president’s Asia tour of 4 countries including India, and as always I’ve so far observed, any discussion on India or China turns into India vs. China, or vice versa. Who is good, who is bad, and so on. Actually, no country is perfect. No system is perfect. It is equally true for the US or UK or whomsoever. There is no ideal model, as each has their own unique set of problems, coloured by their history and culture. China's system is admirable because it has achieved tremendous growth within a relatively short period of time and has uplifted hundreds of millions from poverty. India has a functioning democracy, no matter how much one likes to make a point that they have this or that ‘Maoist’ troubles or occupation and violence in Kashmir.

Of course, these are issues to be dealt with, but in a country with over a billion people, with literally dozens of regional languages and cultural differences, there's a functioning democracy. That is undeniable. Saying that poor, uneducated people vote on being paid is an oversimplification. No other country has as many diverse groups as India, not even a fraction. For example, Belgium is considered to be a very diverse country in Europe. There are three languages. In India there are more languages than all the fingers and toes on our hands and feet, and there are dialects within them that are so different that they are practically distinct languages.

There are problems, grave ones. There are riots, there is casteism, but then there is reservation for both the lower castes as well as the poor. Poor are many and hungry but there is effort on to try and overcome it. The point I’m making is that countries aren't like numbers; we can’t add and subtract their good and bad aspects. They are all part of an imperfect people. One day, there will be electricity in all of India's villages. There will be fewer people hungry. Health care and education will be good and affordable for everyone. But it will regrettably take time. China may one day have a free press, the western parts may become as prosperous as the eastern coastal ones, there may be political freedom, and all that will also take time.

In the meantime, US may be disinterested to hem in China, or will not cheer India or Japan to find antagonism.

I wish I better understood Professor Pang's "accusation" that the United States' was applying "balance of power" politics. Does he truly see that approach as such a negative? It seems to me that it simply reflects the now pretty well evolved post-Cold War international reality and Mr. Obama is simply positioning the United States to eventually become one Great Power among several. As such it's going to join in various alliances and entents with other powers - great and middling. The risks here are obvious based on much history. But, with the United States and Russia in relative decline it's now the way of the world and we must hope that diplomats can do a better job of juggling all those treaties and mutually binding military commitments to come (I'm very pessimistic here, I must sadly say).

Maybe the professor harbors somewhere a desire to see a return of super-power politics? If so, I'm pretty sure not by the traditional wielders of that approach. He may have some other country in mind.

Why have you modified the Northern tip of India ??

Let’s count our blessings by thinking the unthinkable. Suppose McCain had won in ’08, and then, shudder, had most unfortunately, please NO Dear God, passed away just before such a trip as this became unavoidable for the Executive Branch of our government. Everybody feeling better now?

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/11/10/zakaria.asia.us.role/

President Obama's trip to Asia comes at a time when major powers in the region are welcoming a greater U.S. role to counter China's increasingly assertive stance, says CNN analyst Fareed Zakaria.

Obama flew to South Korea Wednesday for the G-20 economic summit meeting, after stops in India and Indonesia.

Zakaria says recent military and economic moves by China are making nations such as Japan, India and South Korea nervous about the potential for Chinese dominance in the region.

"I think that for all of these countries the United States becomes the most important friend to have, the most important ally to have, because it is not threatening, because it is so far away and frankly does not have imperial designs in Asia. But it is powerful enough to balance China, to make China somewhat cautious about being overly aggressive" he said.

Our world is still really a division between the rich and the poor; between the developing countries and the developed countries. If we look at how India, China, and the developing countries vote on human rights issues in the U.N., it is obvious the U.S. is alone with U.K. or other "coalition of the willing."

If we look at Copenhagen, it was obviously the BRIC vs. the U.S. vs. the Europeans.

The notion that the Indian "democracy" and the U.S. "democracy" somehow share a political bond of sort is ridiculous. India is basically viewed much as China is for "stealing" American jobs in the U.S.. Indians are known in the U.S. for having weird English accents when answering Dell's technical support calls.

Let's get real about India's problems too:
http://blog.hiddenharmonies.org/2010/09/american-humanist-association-in...

The Chinese have a saying - we judge people by what they DO, not by what they say.

We only need to look at other Economist articles to see what kind of ugly caricature they have for the Indians.

This tour by accident or design allows China to make a point. It simply doesn't care for the pecking order. I agree. People shouldn't draw the wrong conclusions from it. The most pressing problems that must be resolved are found in Eurasia which require the cooperation of Bejing, Moscow and Washington. When all three are pushing for a peaceful solution to the conflict between India and Pakistan it is more likely to happen. Ditto for Afghanistan, Iran and North Korea.

Of course he is trying to balance China, it would be irresponsible to do otherwise. In fact it is probably even better for China that their ambitions are not allowed to run totally unchecked.

Call this string of pearls II if you like, but it is a very good idea.

The only truth is that U.S. will launch American encirclement to China whether It's a democatic China or not， Just because China has potential to challenge Uncle Sam...
Democratic alliances? What a joke! Just vanish the caste system and headscarf firstly.

Since Asia is undergoing a thriving economic bloom, more and more attention is paid by western developed countries. However, compared to other continents, Asia is a more complicated one, in terms of politics and ideology. It is clever of Americans to separate Asia into two or three categories baed on ideology, and show intimate relationship to just one kind of these counties at a specific time.

Furthermore, it is just the time to reinfore the friendships to his real friends, because it is easy for Obama to receive political support from these brothers which can help him change the embarrassed condition in the mid-term election.

As he expected, it was well done.

Why blame The Global Times? Even The New York Times made the boast (or was it sublimal propaganda?) of pronouncing that the visit by Obama to four major Asian democracies "was no accident".

I can well imagine all the ugly denunciations of kowtowing to the dictators of Beijing anew were Obama to visit China yet again before Hu Jin-tao deems it appropriate to accept the return invitation to visit Washington.

China's overwhelming support to Sri Lanka, Pakistan & Myanmar should be kept on mind.

We are witnessing the initial contours of the noose ment for confining China. How far and how quickly this noose tightens will largely depend on Beijing’s tempering down its arrogance and agenda.

Fortunately, China has revealed its hand prematurely. Reneging on the promise of peaceful rise through concocting claims against almost all neighbors, military muscle flexing and by blatantly practicing balance of power politics. Chinese promise of peaceful rise might well have lost its credibility for good.

This all is fortunate for the democratic world for its Timing!

Like a typical Nouveau riche, if Chinese had not gotten high on arrogance, a few decades later, a revisionist China would have caused far greater damage to freedom. Such a China, inflicting great human suffering would be much harder to restrain.

I really question the ulterior motive of this Economist article. It's so, so much ado aboout nothing and smells foul.

What omission? Does China or Indonesia need a back patting visit as India does? Indonesia President did not even bother to attend the ASEAN members meeting with the US President in NYC only a month back in October.

At the time of Mr. Obama’s traveling, Chinese President was busy visiting Presidents of France and Portugal. I don’t know what spirit or brews were served to hype Mr. and Mrs. Obama in New Delhi as the Economist calls it “song and dance partners”.

For Mr. and Mrs. Hu in Paris, I picked up this tip from a web site:

“At the dinner, the Chateaux Lafite Rothschild wines served were from 1942 to celebrate the year of Hu’s birth; 1949 for the establishment of the People’s Republic of China; 1964 to commemorate Charles de Gaulle’s decision to recognize the Chinese communist regime; 1978 for the start of China’s economic reforms; 2002 for Hu’s ascension to power, and 2008 for the Beijing Olympic games.”

Some service, uh.

China should have no fears of India dominating on global issues against China's interests. Rather it should encourage India's collaboration for peace and harmony in Asia and wholeheartedly support its demand for permanent membership in UN Security Council. India deserves a seat along with China. Both should work together and solve massive problems like poverty and regional imbalnces within their respective territories for the next 20-30 years. We want a genuine Asian Union created and made workable as soon as possible as in the case of European Union.

Allow me to boil down the China issue to a few bullet points:

- China's leadership has deep ties to Mao's general philosophy, whose active ingredient is aggression. It's basis is indeed evil, and although the father of the China's new economic approach was Mr Deng, Mr Mao's influence still pervades through the ranks of its ruling class Communist cadres.

- China will in the end sadistically crush and anhilate Tibetian, and Uighur yearning for freedom and autonomy, while smiling and lying in its public pronouncements/lies to the world.

- China will grab territories and attempt to turn weaker neighbors in to vassal states. It is well positioned to do this in Nepal, Pakistan and Cambodia, and has already achieved this ambition in N. Korea and Myanmar.

- China will have to be defeated or atleast defanged, and only the US has the capability to do this with active help of Japan, Australia, India, Singapore and Thailand.

Good luck and God bless.