As China and India rise in tandem, their relationship will shape world politics. Shame they do not get on better

This article has managed to achieve its purpose i.e., create a catfight between the China and India fronts! Clearly the likes of 'Chinese dragon' and 'True Indian' are just falling prey to this by showcasing their factual knowledge to ridicule the negatives of the two countries. You don't need to be a political expert to understand and accept both the countries have both the good and ugly side of themselves. Despite the negatives of the two countries and difference in approach to national governance, both are attracting lot of attention from the world for the growth they have achieved. As The Economist points out 'their relationship will shape world politics' and I just hope they can go one step further than the west by keeping the differences aside and working together to truly achieve the shift in dominance to the east, surely there is more to be won through peace between the two than a piece of land through war. China and India have evolved to be smart enough to build on their strengths instead of giving into the west's efforts to create a rift and the proof is in the growth both countries have managed to achieve in the recent years.

"Australia is not over populated, it has a big landmass too. Why dont you try building a house in the middle of the continent at the red centre."

Note at the end, I lumped it with Brazil, Canada and Russia. Australia lacks habitable land. It's nice along the coasts but its center will never be heavily populated.

"India has a dense population because the geogrophical conditions support that big a popluation. Fresh water availabillity and fertillity of land supports the growth of the population. "

Able to survive and able to thrive are not one and the same. Yes, India can support 1.2 billion people. Now, can it support 1.2 billion at a developed countries standard of living? Obviously not.

Back to the article:
The contest, if it has to be termed such, is not between India and China. It is between China and the West, and India and the West. There need not be a loser in the contest(s). But the way it looks now, Europe, China and India will win (in that order), the US will lose. It doesn't have to be that way if the American voters are not as pigheaded as the polls would have us believe.

"China and India are civilizations that are much older than the ancient civilizations familiar to the West - Egyptian, Greek, Mayan, Mesopotamian. To view them through the myopic prism of post-WWII world order is, well, myopic."

Uh, dude, Mesopotamia had cities before the Chinese were cooking with fire (seriously, look it up). That's the birth of civilization. Most of the east asian languages were even derived from turkish traders. The middle east, northern Afrcia and eastern Europe have the oldest civilizations. India is about on par with the turks for history. China's a new civilization compared to them.

"Throughout history the Chinese and Indian landmasses have coexisted without conflict while prospering simultaneously. There is no reason to disbelieve that they would do that in today's world. The feces-throwers notwithstanding."

Uh, dude, again, study your history a bit. "China" did not exist as a single country for most of history and its borders were CONSTANTLY changing. The same is true for India. Those areas were kingdoms/empires that had wars and strife much as the rest of the world. Chinese kingdoms did fight wars with Indian kingdoms.

You are buying in to blanket eastern propaganda to easily now.

@ dogsi

"Chinese kingdoms did fight wars with Indian kingdoms."

NOT TRUE. Rest of the post is fine. Although not too sure abt Mesopotamia as "cradle". Everything becomes sonewat "spotty" if u go back dat long in time. In any case it's OT and pointless.

At the moment, China is too far ahead of India. China' economy today is diamond shaped while that of India is still pyramid shaped. Yes, Indians are jealous for the fact only 30 years back the size of economy was similar and now China is 4 times ahead of India!

Give India a decade and half, India will be half of China's economy.

I recommand Indians and Chinese on board here to pick up weapons and shoot out each other.

We need less Indians and Chinese in this world, 4 billion is much better than 6 when it comes to crowdedness, thank you.

"In any case me NOT a believer of the Malthusian nonsense including the fearmongering proposition dat da world is running out of resources. So count me out on dat one!"

I don't either but resources DO matter. Otherwise the UAE would be a very poor area. The "land" advantage goes to America and China, with America having the greater over all land advantage (more arable land, far more resources, and 2 massive coasts). America can comfortable support a larger population than India, as can China.

@Dogsi on your response to my comment:
You see what you want to see. I will not pretend to know more than you and will not say "Dude, look it up". I may have read different books than you did.

Based on what I've read,
Most Indus Valley civilization sites have been dated as prior to any archeological Mesopotamian sites. Every sentence in your paragraph that starts with "Uh dude" is archeologically and/or historically inaccurate.

I said Chinese and Indian landmasses. I made no reference to countries or nation states, which morph according to contemporary politics in any era.

I was not aware of a blanket eastern propaganda machine at work, whatever that may be.

The biggest economy in the world is Europe. There's no reason why we should consider Germany on the same par as America. Chinese, American and Japanese companies are competing against European companies. It's very much "20th century thinking" not to consider Europe as one single market.

@ Dogsi

"I don't either but resources DO matter. Otherwise the UAE would be a very poor area."

That's an "extreme" case like Singapore. Taiwan, SoKo and Japan should have been very poor as well if "resources" were all dat matter.

"The "land" advantage goes to America and China, with America having the greater over all land advantage (more arable land, far more resources, and 2 massive coasts)."

Not dat big of an "advantage" IMO. We are NOT a feudal society anymore. We can agree to disagree of course.

@commensensical:
Going to start at the 15th century, before colonial interference.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15th_century
Wars between areas that are now China and India.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_century
Again, wars between areas that are now China and India.

I've found 8 wars in the 15th century and 13 wars in the 14th century between chinese kingdoms (or areas currently controlled by China) and Indian kingdoms (or areas currently controlled by India).

I don't care to waste more time on this.

India and China are not historically solid kingdoms/empires/countries/ect. but are actually cultural areas. Their "unification" is a generally recent occurance and due mostly to western solidification and recognition of borders post ww2. Before that a country owned what ever it was that they could enforce (not a lot has changed really other than the political tools available now makes war a less likely solution) and many of the "empires" were tributary vasal systems where the weak paid the strong.

Instead of America circling China, it is China that is trying to circle its rivals like India. The help to Maoist from East, the influence in Nepal, the open support to Pakistand and now attempts to influence Sri Lanka. China is playing proxy wars in India thryuits agents, because thought of a free democracy though unweildy democracy is anathema to the autocratic power in China

"And India’s army is, in numbers, *second* only to China’s and America’s"

Unless my English is that bad, or American English is that different from British English, second should be third.

I think the real issue between India and China is that both are sensitive to becoming encircled and either may lash out dangerously in response. For India that would be either in India itself (more aggressively towards its Maoists), Pakistan, or Kashmir & Jammu. For China we have Tibet, Xinjiang, or Chinese Kashmir. Some serious civil or brotherly war could bring the whole region into war (a la either World War). The lack of capable institutions to settle disputes in India is a reflection of this reality, not its cause. I disagree with your conclusions, because neither solve the encirclement problem you identify in your piece.

@ Pascal Leroy

"There's no reason why we should consider Germany on the same par as America."

I am sure u meant Europe rite? For otherwise it conjures up some unpleasant images ;-) Es tut mir sehr leid. No offense if u r from Deutschland.

China and India and the US and the rest of the world are heading into uncharted territory.

The short term progress may likely result in very long term pain for the economy. The repercussions are global.

When a Billion Chinese Jump - by Jonathan Watts
-----------------------------------------------

This is about how 1.4 billion Chinese preferring to live better today than trust the promise of a socialist paradise tomorrow. There is a consequential shock to the world economy that will come from massive damage to the atmosphere, soil, water, forests and generally limited natural resources. In the past decade the price has been paid - acute and chronic water shortages, toxic algae blooms, desertification, acid rain, dying grasslands and angry people.

Read about nature reserves where the animals are served up in official banquets, to the tragic province of Henan, once held up as an example of Maoist development, now stricken by poverty, soil exhaustion, corruption and an Aids epidemic.

The Yellow River, the birthplace of Chinese civilisation is all but destroyed. The government has encouraged the people to move west from the overpopulated heartland into the arid and mountainous lands of the Uighurs and the Tibetans, places able to support sparse populations but where ecosystems rapidly collapse under the weight of numbers. The days of the last remaining paradise, the astonishingly biodiverse province of Yunnan, according to Watts, are numbered.

If this is a bleak story it is because the prospects are bleak.

The destinies of India and China and the rest of the world are inter-twined for better, or, realistically, for worse.

Nostradamus did predict that the day China is awake, the world will shiver. Something of the sort is happening. Nostradamus should have predicted something similar for India because both countries embarked on some form of economic revolution only recently. China started in 1970 and India in 1992. That`s the reason why China is a step ahead. What is worth observing also is that the trajectory of both countries is a bit different. While China`s growth comes from industrial production that of India is more services oriented. So they complement each other. These two countries , while being competitors of some sort are also getting closer. They are in the G 20, meet at the level of the BRIC, take common positions on many international fora. At some point in time they would end up concluding a Bilateral deal and that would be the deal of the century.

I do not see how their relations are worsening. The contrary is true and it is in their best interest to keep on improving same.

@dogsi: I totally concur that the unification of "cultural areas" into nation states with often arbitrarily drawn borders is a recent post-WWII occurence.
This applies to India and to an extent China, but also to most of what is now the EU, the ASEAN countries, the Middle East, and if you wind the clock back a little bit, to North America, South America, the erstwhile USSR.
I fail to see your point.

Two lousy elephants.

@meanbearpiggy:
"Based on what I've read,
Most Indus Valley civilization sites have been dated as prior to any archeological Mesopotamian sites. Every sentence in your paragraph that starts with "Uh dude" is archeologically and/or historically inaccurate."

I guess it does depend on your definition of civilization... define that first and we'll talk dates.

Mesopotamia had farming before Mehrgarh by about 4,000 years. Mesopotamia had pottery before Indus Valley by about 1,600 years. Mesopotamia had cities before Indus Valley by about 3,000 years. Mesopotamia had a kingdom in 5,600 BC, about 1,300 years before Indus Valley. Indus valley is close enough to Mesopotamia and traded with Mesopotamia, so it is likely that many of their developments were due to Mesopotamia, as is the case with Egypt, Syria, Turkey, ect. Want me to provide references for these?

So, please, if you can tell me in what way did indus valley predate mesopotamia I'd be genuinely interested to learn it. I find this subject to be interesting.

The propaganda I was refering to was generally about China. India does have one of the worlds oldest and most influential civilizations. China does not.