If Nepal is key to China’s domestic stability in Tibet, why does Kathmandu not see the region as its strongest leverage and bargaining chip in engaging with Beijing?
China’s most critical international relationship remains with the US. With Donald Trump returning to the presidency, China-US relations are expected to face intensified challenges.
While much of China’s current focus is on stabilising relations with the US and the West, its approach towards several Asian countries has been less conciliatory.
China Wednesday released foreign policy document where it notes challenges facing Asia, progress in bilateral ties with neighbours & BRI plans, among other things.
In exclusive interview with ThePrint, Seyed Rasoul Mousavi also spoke about ambitious International North-South Transport Corridor & Tehran’s ‘good ties’ with both India and China.
China's foreign policy will now revolve mainly around two key people. And one of them, as director of Central Foreign Affairs Commission, will report directly to Xi Jinping.
India's issue isn't only about providing resources to the armed forces, but that political leadership must move away from sloganeering to outcome-centric on reforms.
Once Sri Lanka and Pakistan get through their current challenges, most likely with IMF’s support, they would do well to scale back their reliance on China.
In a seminal work, former military officers Lt. Gen. D.S. Hooda & Lt. Col. Pavithran Rajan put forth a framework to approach cognitive warfare, called Socio-Technical-Cognitive Battlespace.
India, China and Russia share more contradictions than congruence. Each has a different worldview, as also a different adversary. The rude fact is, BRICS is the most irrelevant of all such groupings.
Uncle A is mistaking total diplomatic submission for “geopolitical wisdom.” The article isn’t calling for Nepal to “provoke” China; it’s highlighting how Kathmandu has become so allergic to its own sovereignty that it now bans academic seminars at Beijing’s whisper. If he thinks the only way for a nation to survive is to preemptively censor its own universities to satisfy a foreign power, he isn’t describing a “fraught exercise” in diplomacy…he’s describing a client state
Forget Nepal, a yam. Even for India, the second boulder, playing the Tibet card is a fraught exercise. The whole world recognises Tibet to be an integral part of China. Not a disputed territory whose future is to be settled through peaceful dialogue. It would be exceedingly unwise for Nepal to provoke China on this issue. If memory serves one right, six former Nepali ambassadors to China had warned the government against hosting such an event.
Uncle A is mistaking total diplomatic submission for “geopolitical wisdom.” The article isn’t calling for Nepal to “provoke” China; it’s highlighting how Kathmandu has become so allergic to its own sovereignty that it now bans academic seminars at Beijing’s whisper. If he thinks the only way for a nation to survive is to preemptively censor its own universities to satisfy a foreign power, he isn’t describing a “fraught exercise” in diplomacy…he’s describing a client state
Forget Nepal, a yam. Even for India, the second boulder, playing the Tibet card is a fraught exercise. The whole world recognises Tibet to be an integral part of China. Not a disputed territory whose future is to be settled through peaceful dialogue. It would be exceedingly unwise for Nepal to provoke China on this issue. If memory serves one right, six former Nepali ambassadors to China had warned the government against hosting such an event.