I am happy this guy is not National Security Advisor to Modi. His is revisionist perspective on Sino-Indian relations - i.e. a predominantly rightist nationalism of ethnic Hindu’s vis-à-vis Hans Chinese. He seems to envy the rise of mainland China as a super power; yet, if he reads Chinese official analysis of bilateral relations, he might be shocked to find how Xi recognizes India’s strategic place in the region, since he came to power. He established the National Security Council with the principle idea of vetting all strategic military decision-making by PLA. PLA was hitherto a state-within-the-state….



First, 1962 War Report by Australian Army Officer still lies locked inside Indian PMs archives. Nehru asked for the report after defeat of Indian Army…and it must finally be released by Modi to let the truth of 1962 War out in the public eye. What is Indian Government trying to hide when we know most of its essential content? Is it Nehru’s legacy or his false historical pretense (like the author's)?



Post-1947/49 East-West Himalayan boarders between sovereign India and PRC – inherited from British Raj - has never been officially delineated; although Nehru used false British maps to instigate PLA in southern Tibet (1962). “In fact, under the (1954) treaty, India forfeited all of the extraterritorial rights and privileges in Tibet that it had inherited from imperial Britain”, he claims, without any reference to Mao’s revolutionary goal to unite the mainland (after Kuomintang lordships).



The Indian & Chinese revolutions were fundamentally directed at dislodging all its imperial past and restoring sovereign unity of the two ancient civilizations. Tibet is still officially an autonomous region of PRC; but under the CPC leadership. For modern China, territorial integrity and sovereignty is fundamental…after centuries of imperial conquest and rule.



However, claims by both sides in Arunachal Pradesh will eventually be settled…on historical records. India has a better case but must convince China of its cultural links long before western civilization.



Second, Ex-PM Dr. Manmohan Singh agreed during his tenure to set up the BRICS New Development Bank (NDB) in Shanghai. Modi was not in a position to change that decision. However an Indian will preside on NDB. BTW bulk of the funds will be deployed on infrastructure development, including Xi’s Silk Road Project to link the neighborhoods.



Third, his argument about Panchila (1954) - five principles of peaceful coexistence – is blatantly false; Sukarno expanded and developed it further @ Bandung Conference – to utter consternation of CIA.



And it eventually lead to SEATO - as the sequel to Nato - in S.E.Asia - with Pakistan & Thailand military juntas as its nexus. The author refuses to acknowledge the cold war and its earliest influence on Sino-Indian relations under Panchila. That India was in the Russian sphere of influence under Nehru. And US/CIA & Japan regarded India as a renegade….



In 1980s, India & China GDP was more or less on par. Today mainland China’s GDP is five times India’s. Unlike the claims made by the author, Modi is focused on sectoral development – not military deterrence – and FDI to grow the subcontinent into a complimentary power in the region.

