General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

K `
CaspianReport
comments

Comments by "K `" (@user-jt3dw6vv4x) on "CaspianReport" channel.

Yeah it's really quite ridiculous. Xi Jinping saying "Asians should take care of the interests of Asia" was seen as a threat to the US.
29
@Spanish_Patriot Idk if you know the full story but the US supported the Bangladeshi genocide and encouraged the transfer of arms from the Middle East into Pakistan so they can genocide the Bangladeshis in 1971. The genocide preceded the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War which resulted in clear cut support from the Soviets for India and support from the US for Pakistan. President Nixon viewed the Bangladeshis with contempt and made racist remarks about them and relied on Americans not paying attention to events in Asia due to the genocide.
20
@Nasrudith No they're actually right. Half of Pakistan is Iranic in culture and ethnicity. Western Pakistan is inhabited by Pashtuns and Baluchis, who are Iranian-related ethnic groups. Their culture is Iranic, they celebrate Iranian festivals like Nowruz and their traditional clothing is related to the traditional clothes of Iran. Their cultural root is Iranic. Eastern Pakistan, which is the seat of the Pakistani government and home to the dominant ethnic group of the country, on the other hand is ethnically related to people in western and northern India and their cultural root is Indic. I don't think Greece and Ireland share a common cultural root in the closest of extents, unless you are talking about the broad Greco-Roman heritage that binds Western culture in general which then is comparable to the broad Indic and Sinic heritage that binds most of Asia.
15
They're neutral but India ought to ditch the US for their own good imo
14
@AegonTargaryen300 That is unless they solve their border disputes. It seemed impossible until Russia invaded Ukraine earlier this year. For the first time, mainstream Chinese and Indian media and people were espousing the same views and Chinese state media for the first time took a softer approach on India, supporting and defending the position of India in the war. If this war continues to polarise the Global North and Global South, then I wouldn't be surprised if a partnership of some sort emerged between the two. Many proponents in China and India acknowledge the historical co-existence and deep cultural exchange between the two nations until the colonisation of Asia and always highlight the fact that the division between the two is the result of borders drawn up by British rulers. What many don't realise is that China and India will always look after the interests of the Global South regardless of their political positions. This is why China and India were strong proponents of waiving vaccine IP in 2021 so they could both produce vaccines that could be sent to the developing world free of charge, whereas the Global North refused. If the war continues and China continues to find apertures in India's relationship with the West, then it shouldn't be a surprise to see the Chinese government bolster its pro-Asian rhetoric (which is heavy on the idea that the US is a threat to stability in Asia) when communicating with India which it has been doing in the rest of Asia since the 2010s.
8
@WastedBananas They do have similarities and those similarities are why Xi Jinping and Chinese state media keeps talking about "Asia for Asians" or how they declared India's Mars mission was the "pride of Asia". The CCP is using a tested method to rile up pan-Asian feelings across Asia, including in India. They're clever by doing this because most of Asia is developing. China is juxtaposing Asian geography, mentality and cultural similarities against Western mentality and culture in order to convince Asia that they should choose China and not the US.
7
@WastedBananas Omg, I can't believe this was even said. So naïve, my gosh. We are talking about geopolitics here not the arbitrary definition of "Asian American" or something.
7
@gabor-zsoltbenedek9420 Switch? Where have you been? 😭 The US has always supported Pakistan and that is the reason why India, today, still has a close relationship with Russia. The US has traditionally always been anti-India, even going so far as to have Pres. Nixon make derogatory remarks about Indians because he was pro-Pakistan. The US trying to court India is a very new thing due to China's rise. The US wants to get as many Asian nations on its side to "contain" China as part of its US forward defence ring that encircles Asia, which is why they're even trying to build ties with Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka, the latter of which was courted in 2019 by the Americans to establish a military base on its territory. People think that for countries to cooperate, they must see eye to eye on all things but they don't. They just focus on their own interests. It honestly makes sense for India from a geographical, cultural and economic perspective to engage with China rather than the US. The US has never actually cared about India and they still don't. If China hadn't risen, India would mean nothing to the US.
7
@Tounguepunchfartbox Yeah but that's the thing. The US is not a local player and that's what makes everybody in the Asian and Pacific region wary of the US. The Trump presidency really sped up China's expansion in the region during the late 2010s. While Trump refused to attend any of the major Asia-Pacific summits, China was able to convince countries in the region that the US is no longer reliable and that they can be relied upon. Additionally, China has promoted the idea that "Asia must be controlled by Asians" and recent evidence has shown that this mentality has begun to creep into the minds of average citizens in other Asian countries like Singapore. Then in 2021, the US left Afghanistan under Biden and it further convinced people here that the US can't be relied upon. Vietnam and Afghanistan are consistently brought up about how the US is a failure when it comes to Asian affairs. Then this year, Russia invaded Ukraine and while the US has its own reasons to not get directly involved, it further convinced people that the US can't be relied on. Taiwan is quite fearful because they fear that the US and its allies won't be there if China invades the island. In the end, Asia has everything to lose. Asia-Pacific will be the first to suffer. The US will not lose anything because they aren't part of the region. This is why a lot of countries in the region want to balance China and the US, they despise having to pick sides and would prefer if Asia-Pacific can become multipolar instead of unipolar. Nobody wants to become a pawn between China and the US.
6
@WastedBananas FYI, the phrase "Asian for Asians" originates in Imperial Japan and was a rallying cry to colonised nations in South and Southeast Asia, including India, to accept Japan's rise and stand with them in getting their freedom from Europeans. That led to WW2 and the creation of multiple Japanese puppet states that accepted this ideology, including one in India called Azad Hind. "Asia for Asians" has always been about pan-Asianism juxtaposed against Western hegemony. Bffr
6
@WastedBananas Nobody in a single Asian country uses "Asian" as a marker for physical appearance or race. It is simply about geography, don't bring these American colloquialisms into a thing like geopolitics. Can't believe I even have to say this under a video like this. So cringe.
6
@WastedBananas No they absolutely do not mean that LMAOOOO. Nobody in Asia is race/physical appearance obsessed, let alone even cares for such words. If that were the case, China wouldn't be trying to drive a wedge between India and the West or use its cultural influence to sway opinions in South and Southeast Asia using "Buddhist diplomacy". Their rhetoric has also been accepted by Russia, who sees itself as "Eurasian".
6
@Abhinav-m4o Nobody has ever truly taken Turkey seriously. They joined NATO and are considered the black sheep of the group, they have for years tried to join the EU but for a plethora of reasons, nobody supports them (especially Greece) and they have tried to host the Summer Olympics but nobody votes for them at the IOC
6
@L425-g1f All Asia-Pacific countries have close economic ties with China, even if they don't like the CCP. Japan's largest trade partner is China, India's largest trade partner is China, the largest trade partner for Southeast Asian countries is China. China being Australia's largest trading partner is no surprise either. Despite geopolitical differences, the region is deeply connected economically.
6
@goeast12 Singapore is diverse, the only reason why you think it's not diverse is because you think Chinese and Malays are the same and that Indians being Asians too means that "Singapore is not diverse". I've heard this argument made by many Westerners who try undermine Singapore's success, they say "everybody is Asian". Chinese, Malays and Indians are all different to one another, just because they're all from the same continent doesn't mean they're all the same. The Chinese and Malays suffered from extreme racial riots which led to Singapore becoming a country. Singapore managed to unite the Chinese, Malays and Indians and used common ground (which came to be known as "Asian values" in the 1990s) to create the most stable and successful multi-ethnic nation in Asia. Look at Singapore's neighbours (near and far), Malaysia, Indonesia, Myanmar, Sri Lanka they all suffer from racial division. Singapore is diverse and it knows how to manage its diversity without alienating anybody at a national level.
6
@johnnysack3673 It really hasn't. The US has always supported Pakistan over India. When India faced its deadliest terror attack in Mumbai in 2008 and the terrorists were revealed to be from Pakistan, the US continued to maintain its close relationship with Pakistan. Then in 2011, when it was revealed that Pakistan had been hiding Bin Laden, the US continued to maintain its close relationship with Pakistan. The US seems to always be on the wrong side in South Asia. The most shocking of their actions is that they encouraged and supported Pakistan's genocide of Bangladeshis in 1971 and President Nixon infamously made some pretty racist remarks about Bangladeshis and wanted Americans to refrain from paying attention to events in Asia, due to the ongoing genocide.
5
@Izeliii Trump supporters till don't see what the issue is
5
@Tounguepunchfartbox You publishing that comment only shows me you don't know how to respond to me because I spilled the truth. I live in the Asia-Pacific region, I am fully aware of what goes on here and what the average people in countries like Indonesia, Australia and Singapore feel. Nothing "dumb" about anything I said. Nobody here wants to be pushed around by the US or China.
4
@captainalex157 If one truly believes that India can rise with the US at the top, then they really don't have any understanding of the concept of American exceptionalism. The US preferably wants a weak India that allies completely with the US and becomes an all-weather partner on the global stage. Basically a 2023 Japan but without the advanced part. If India can remain a lower middle income developing nation then that's ideal. The Americans let China develop rapidly during the 1990s and 2000s, under a belief China was going to join the world after the 2008 Beijing Olympics only for that to change with the rise of Xi Jinping. There is no way the US is going to make the same mistake with India. India will remain an undeveloped nation crippled with poverty for the foreseeable future if things work out right for the Americans.
4
@WastedBananas You seem to be coming from some Western or rather American perspective about the cultural or physical differences between Chinese and Indian people outside the realm of geopolitics because you don't want to be associated with them. This is not what anybody here is talking about and that's certainly not what actual people in Asia think in this context. China and India have more in common with each other than they do with Western countries, that is the point being made. Of course they do, a look at their history of cultural exchange it is clear to see. Your personal identity of being Muslim or "Bharati" or whatever has nothing to do with this. We're talking about geopolitics and China and India are culturally connected whether you like it or not.
4
@captainalex157 The difference between Europe and India is that India is not Western and never will be Western. There is nothing culturally, mentally or physically similar that White Americans share with Indians. White Americans are descendants of Europeans, they are family. There has only ever been one non-White nation in the world that has become accepted by the West and that is Japan but it wasn't an easy road. The Meiji era, fear of Western colonisation, desire to become Western and WW2 created a path for Japan to become accepted by the West. Then the 1980s saw Japan become America's first economic rival. Thankfully for the Americans, Japan's economy tanked in the 1990s and it has been downhill since. The idea that India will be accepted and treated as an equal is far fetched and preposterous in my opinion. Biden mulled sanctioning India in 2022 because of is neutral stance in the Ukraine War and a recent book published by an American diplomat suggests India could become a future competitor of the US. India and the US have never been allies, in fact it was not until 9/11 that India and the US started building closer ties to combat terrorism but still not allies. Before that, the US government hated India, particularly under Nixon. India sees itself as a part of the Global South and clearly said it is going to use its platform as the G20 presidency this year to further Global South agendas, the US doesn't like that and never will. India's development path is one that is muddy and uncertain.
4
@anomalianomali5080 No. Sinosphere cultures and in general all Asian cultures do understand the concept of solidarity. A very big part of Eastern values is community. People look out for the community over the individual. In Asian cultures, community is stressed whereas in the West, individualism is stressed. This is why saving face is such a big part of Asian cultures. This stark cultural difference was evident during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. An August 2020 survey from the World Economic Forum revealed most people in China, Japan, Vietnam and India said they would still wear a face mask, whereas people in the UK, US and Germany who said they'd wear a face mask was significantly less. Demands for personal freedom in the forms of protests emerged across Europe and North America while such attitudes, on such a large scale, did not emerge in Asia in 2020. People across Asia (including in areas where face masks are not regularly used) started wearing face masks very early on in 2020, due to this idea that you have to protect yourself and the wider community.
4
It is correct
3
@gdi1093 1. "Asian" in this context is referring to Asia-Pacific or Indo-Pacific which generally means East, South, Southeast Asia and Oceania. 2. Do you not understand that the Indian subcontinent is part of Asia? It makes it sound like you don't. 3. Do you understand Asian geopolitics? Iran's geopolitical landscape is connected to the Middle East and to some extent Central Asia. It is not part of the same geopolitical landscape that covers East Asia, Southeast Asia, South Asia and Oceania. So why on earth would Iran join an Asia-Pacific organisation that is focused on issues in the waters surrounding India, Sri Lanka, Southeast Asia, East Asia, Australia and the South Pacific and the land the region covers? 4. You sound so bitter, it's laughable.
3
@gdi1093 Where on earth do you live? If you live in the Asia-Pacific and follow Asian geopolitics, you'll know that sometimes experts use "Asian" to describe the Asia-Pacific (including Australia and New Zealand) for easier communication. It's not something to get worked up about. Asia is so huge, just because Iran, Pakistan, China etc. are all on the same continent doesn't mean they're affected by the same issues, they're not. Same thing applies to Australia, it's geographically close to Southeast Asia and northeast Indian Ocean and a lot of its trade comes down the South China Sea. Iran has literally nothing to do with this. Stop crying.
3
It surprises me that Pakistan, which has existed for longer and larger in size, has been surpassed by Bangladesh (which was once part of Pakistan and described as a "basket case" in the 1970s). Bangladesh is now described as an "Asian Tiger" and has a plan to become fully developed by 2041. There are multiple factors involved but I think the constant looking outward frame of mind instead of focusing on yourself as well as the heavy reliance on religion and continued rise in religious conservatism is why Pakistan is so far behind. The 21st Century is described as the Asian Century as so many Asian nations lift themselves up and remain relatively stable but then there's Pakistan which is described as being on the "brink of collapse".
3
@Tounguepunchfartbox Yeah but the thing is Indonesia and most other parts of Asia prefer to not pick sides. They want to be free but China and the US keep competing for influence in the region without just co-existing and it's making people very frustrated. Most countries in Asia do no want to pick a side so they keep hedging between China and the US hoping that a are between the two will not occur.
3
What the hell are you talking about? The islands are part of India so they're part of Asia. Did you just infer that India is not part of Asia? Talk about ignorance.
3
@captainalex157 India doesn't need the US or Europe to develop quickly, they've had plenty of time to develop quickly with American and European FDI and look what they have to show for it in 2023. They're a country that plays all sides and considering the fact that the US doesn't want India to develop into a competitive nation and it has become clearer by the day ever since Russia invaded Ukraine, the Indians have already lost. The thing is India doesn't want to become a world power, many think rising nations want to become world powers but that's not what many emerging nations actually want. India simply wants to maintain their sphere of influence in Asia without being bothered. India has pursued neutrality ever since the culmination of WW2, that won't change anytime soon and the Ukraine War has only reinforced the fact that they will remain neutral and conduct business in the way that it suits them.
3
@riderchallenge4250 and US military presence everywhere is why there is growing backlash. Don't be surprised if those three countries and a selection of other Global South nations find ways to detach from the US-oriented world order. The Ukraine War changed a lot of non-Western people's perceptions for the worse (from an American perspective that is).
3
@possiblyzero3582 China and India's border dispute is the result of European colonisation and this is constantly brought up by Asianists. The Himalayas and Tibetan Plateau were never a source of contention in the ancient times and there are areas in the Himalayan region of India and the Tibetan region in China that are sacred to followers of Dharmic faiths. One of the most important sites in Hinduism is located in modern China. So the border dispute isn't something of their doing, the Indians simply inherited it from the British Raj.
3
Then the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks happened and close relations between Pakistan and the US endured, even though the terrorists came from Pakistan. This happened during the era of Bush. In 2011, Bin Laden was found hiding in Pakistan but the US continued to maintain close relations with Pakistan. The first president in 21st century US history to really take things to another level was Donald Trump. Regardless of what people feel for him, his attitude towards India and Indian people was different to other presidents. I don't know which type of Indians were receptive to things he said but I do remember the articles about how he focused on India, which was different to previous presidents that had maintained focus on Pakistan. I'm not a fan of Trump but in regards to US relations with India, he was willing to bend the rules and deviate from traditional US foreign policy.
3
It's correct
3
It's correct
3
@goeast12 Malays are NOT East Asians. So you can't say "more than 90% East Asian". To say it's "more than 90% East Asian" is only indicative of one's lack of knowledge on Singaporean multiracialism. Malays are native Southeast Asians and have always been viewed as such. Chinese (and Japanese, Koreans) are known as East Asians while Indians (and Ceylonese, Bengalis etc.) are South Asians. This distinction has always been noted until the 21st century, including by Singapore's founding father, Lee Kuan Yew, as Singapore is described as a "mini Asia" composed of people of East Asian, Southeast Asian and South Asian origin.
3
@goeast12 Chinese, Malays and Indians are all from different cultures. The idea that Singapore is not diverse because most people are from different Asian groups is wrong because you're implying that they are all basically the same. Asia is a diverse place. You are only saying this because in the US, many European-descended people (excluding those of Italian and other Mediterranean and eastern European people) have lost touch with their ancestral heritage and so now they're just a mish-mash of different European groups with no unified cultural heritage. It may be news to you but local Chinese, Malays and Indians find more in common culturally with Malaysians (who are composed of the same racial makeup, with the same ethnic subgroups and share pretty much the same culture) than they do with people that come from mainland China or India. There is extreme xenophobia and racism directed towards people from mainland China and India in Singapore. So saying "it's not diverse" doesn't make sense. Singapore actually has a lot of temporary immigrants from other parts of Asia as well as PR from other parts of Asia. It is very much diverse, just not in the way you're used to. Local Singaporeans of diverse origins alongside foreign workers and expats from Malaysia, India, China, Philippines, Bangladesh, Indonesia and Myanmar among other places. It's diverse even beyond its own local population. If it wasn't diverse, anti-immigrant sentiment and the whole "Singapore for Singaporean" mentality wouldn't exist and be a contentious issue.
3
India is very slow, by the time they decide to make a move on anything, things have changed considerably. We're talking about a country that was a centre of global civilisation in the ancient days and now look at them. I don't get it.
3
Agreed. The ultranationalists are always out and about saying all sorts of things.
2
@太陽マン-u1l The only Asian country that has significant global influence is China, not India, not Indonesia, not South Korea and not Japan.
2
@marcusaetius9309 Yeah they did
2
India is called a "subcontinent" in reference to its ethnic diversity because every state in the country has its own language, culture and ethnic group. It's basically like a continent. It's still a part of the Asian continent.
2
@ozairmehmood2016 Both India and Pakistan have issues but lynching and burning a man, then taking selfies with the corpse is very sickening. I'm not from India or Pakistan but that incident with the Sri Lankan worker was reported on national TV in my country and people were really shocked. It's not something to be proud about. Religious conservatism does nothing to progress a country. India is at a crossroads between choosing religious extremism or secularism but Pakistan is so far down the lane of religious extremism that I honestly think it's beyond saving at this point (unless people collectively wake up and realise the damage it is causing).
2
@uzochiokeke4328 With this attitude you're basically asking them to do as you say or be punished. Y'all sound just like the Americans at this point. Would expect you to understand this after how the Americans have treated India's decision to remain neutral in the Ukraine War but clearly not. Big countries will always push smaller countries around either bullying them or downright subjugation.
2
@leonal522 Yes I fully agree with you. The foreign policies of China, India and many other Asian and African nations are rooted in non-alignment and so they have a seat on the fence where they can see both sides equally. They're able to play both sides because of their neutrality.
2
@captainalex157 You have a positive attitude, you simply want the best of both worlds and I can't argue with you on that. Thanks for the discussion, it was good. :)
2
@ridhwanasri5913 Hmm but that doesn't mean anything though. Thai Chinese are "Thai", practice Thai culture, speak Thai language, use Thai names and practice the Thai form of Buddhism. Everything about their identity is Thai and this is due to government policy which demanded all Chinese people in Thailand to adopt Thai culture and identity. 40% of Thai people have at least some Chinese ancestry, it's just a part of the ethnic framework of Thailand, it's not political. Just because one has a Chinese grandfather or Chinese father, does not mean they will immediately side with China. Many Thai celebrities are full or half Chinese. When a Thai actor whose half Chinese made a statement showing support for Hong Kong, he was cancelled by Chinese people in China and the popular TV show he was starring in was boycotted by Chinese people. There is a difference between "Chinese" as an ethnic identity and "Chinese" as a political identity. The same thing can apply to Singapore but in the case of Singapore, those Singaporean Chinese who empathise with China are part of a broader effort by the Chinese government to woo overseas ethnic Chinese and generate this idea that Asia is facing a threat from the US. The Chinese government is increasingly creating this idea of the need for ethnic Chinese to support China because an attack against China will be an attack against all ethnic Chinese. The Chinese government is also broadly encouraging pan-Asian sentiment in Asia in general, pushing this rhetoric that "Asian people should be in charge of Asia".
2
@Toon_With_Tune It's controlled by Pakistan so it's part of Pakistan. Just because you believe it is an "integral" part of India, does not mean the world sees it that way. China believes Arunachal Pradesh is an integral part of China so should all maps depict that Arunachal Pradesh is part of China instead of India (despite the fact that India controls Arunachal Pradesh)?
2
@Toon_With_Tune That part of Kashmir is part of Pakistan, whether you like it or not. They control so it's part of Pakistan. Idc about Akhand Bharat, yes India, Pakistan and Bangladesh were all part of the same country at one point in time but they're now all separate nations. Just accept it.
2
@Toon_With_Tune Don't start getting upset at China's expansionism when you believe in taking over other areas as well.
2
@Toon_With_Tune China believes that Arunachal Pradesh is proudly part of China. Will you accept their territorial "integrity" too or does it only apply to India? Why would you speak Hindi if I can't even understand it?
2
@Toon_With_Tune I can't understand anything that you're saying. You're wasting your time speaking in Hindi while using Latin letters to write it. Why don't any of you use the Devanagari script to write it?
2
@Toon_With_Tune So it's in your constitution? So what about theirs? They believe it belongs to them so why does your view trump everybody else's view? Why do you think India's constitution is the only truth?
2
@ZontarDow How is it working?
2
By simply maintaining an economic relationship with both, that's the furthest they're going at the moment.
2
@TheGahta The Greenlandic people want to be free, neither American nor Danish
2
Absolutely not. 💀
2
@dragosstanciu9866 There is a lot for you to learn.
2
@awijaya2116 You bring up a very interesting question regarding the American view of India. In the eyes of the US and pretty much the rest of the Western world, India is always juxtaposed with China. To the US, India is what they want China to be. The American view always stresses the fact that India is a democracy and thus as a democratic nation, India is always seen as a country that the US can work with (even though historically both countries have never been close). Personally, I think the American view of India will change as the country continues to grow - at least to an extent. If we look at history, the US has never been fond of another country challenging American hegemony. The government and those in positions of influence will find a difference between India and the US and use that to construct a narrative that pits the two countries against. All this talk of the Asian Century has also received negative reports. So in the future, with China projected to be at the top and India challenging the US economically, that negative rhetoric we've seen when some people talk about the Asian Century will probably become more prominent.
2
@muhamadizhamm1831 You look like a Bangladeshi
2
@sekhamyu Last time I checked you're not a bureaucrat so your opinion doesn't matter. Malaysia tip toeing around and criticising China on one hand and then supporting it on the other is the reason why ASEAN is a failure.
2
I understand what you're saying but the way you phrased it is wrong. Asia is culturally Eastern both philosophically, culturally and mentally. What you are talking about are Western institutions, most countries in the world have Western institutions.
2
@anomalianomali5080 Collectivism in East Asia and other Asian cultures for that matter is not dictated by rule-based hierarchy, it's based on respect for one another and is similar to other similar values that are taught in traditional Asian belief systems like filial piety. I think you have a skewed perception of East Asian cultures and believe that East Asian cultures only practice values like collectivism due to an "overbearing body of power", that's not the case.
2
That's literally his voice. Are you new here?
2
The West supported India for hundreds of years? Huh??? You may want to do a little research on the way the US was always against India from the time of the Cold War. When they were fighting a war with Pakistan in the 1970s, the US supported the Pakistanis and President Nixon was staunchly anti-Indian. If I was in charge of India, I'd do a 180 and embrace China in full just to spite them.
2
because they annexed it and it's under their control.
2
@goeast12 Singapore is a small country and uses that to excuse itself from accepting refugees, whether that's right or wrong it's not my place to say. Singapore is also very strict when it comes to managing its own ethnic diversity. It gives preference to people from Malaysia, China (including Hong Kong) and India because people from those places are of the same ethnic or of related ethnic origin to local Singaporeans. Singaporean government uses Malaysian+Chinese+Indian immigration to maintain the ratio of Chinese to Malays to Indians (the fertility rates of all three groups are incredibly low, with the Chinese and Indians having statistically less than 1 baby - 0.9 - each year). You also can't compare Singapore's ethnic demographics to the USA's ethnic demographics. Remember, the US only consisted of 13 colonies along the east coast that were taken from Native American populations. On top of that, slaves of West African origin were brought over to the US adding to the ethnic demographics. Additionally, the USA's expansion west meant it acquired land that was originally owned by Spain (and post-independent Mexico) which was already home to many people of Latin American origin (of whom many are of European origin as well as mestizo origin). Singapore's native people are Malays and like the rest of Southeast Asia, thousands of ethnic Chinese and ethnic Indian migrants settled in Singapore over the 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th centuries. Singapore and the US have different histories and different geographies.
2
Grow up!
2
@bxzidffbxzidff The two countries are nuclear armed nations so I highly doubt they're going to engage in a full blown war. Also, let's not forget the fact that the main reason why India and China are at each other's throats is due to British colonisation. Pre-colonisation, India and China had no issue and were bound together by cultural exchange (e.g. spread of Buddhism). As someone else said, India and China are the yin and yang of Asia - they keep the balance in Asia and always have since ancient times (e.g. most of Asia is culturally tied to China and India and are the dominant powers in the region).
2
Use Google, then you will understand
1
it's correct
1
He lives in Azerbaijan 🙄
1
@yolemae6580 You're joking right? The US has military bases dotted all across the Asia and the Pacific.
1
@yolemae6580 What other countries?
1
@yolemae6580 All of those areas are within the control of those countries, be serious. It's just that there are separatists in those regions who wish they were independent. Are you going to tell me that Canada is occupying Quebec? Are you going to tell me that the UK is occupying Scotland?
1
@yolemae6580 You can't compare any of that to the fact that US military bases dot the entirety of the Indo-Pacific stretching from Diego Garcia, just south of the Maldives in the Indian Ocean all the way across the Western Pacific up to Japan. It's literally an entire arc and the USA is not close to any of these bases. Maybe you'll understand why China is so angry because it's literally surrounded by US military bases and is destabilising peace in the Asian region.
1
@yolemae6580 The Americans haven't stopped militarising Asia. They tried to set up military bases on the island nation of Sri Lanka back in 2019 to continue surrounding China but failed due to mass protests, due to fears that the American military will be able to commit crimes and get away with it. A clause in the SOFA said that the US military will be exempt from Sri Lankan law and it generated fear akin to what has happened in Okinawa, Japan where US military have raped and murdered Japanese girls. It must be noted that thousands of Sri Lankan women and other Asian (including Korean) women were trafficked to US military bases in South Korea during and in the aftermath of the Korean War to work as comfort women. In South Korea, these women are known as "kijichon" or "Yankee princess" (translated into Korean as foreigner's w****) and their history is still a point of political tension. That's one of the many dark sides of US military presence in Asia, local women face systemic abuse to please American soldiers.
1
India should swing to China-Russia for three reasons: their economic success, stability in Asia and to spite the US.
1
@quartermaster1976 No
1
Cutting India's water supply will also cut off the water supply to Bangladesh. China also has control over the water sources for the whole of mainland Southeast Asia (Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam) and damming those rivers will lead to no fresh water in mainland Southeast Asia. China is very interested in Tibet because Tibet is known as the "water tower of Asia" as it supplies so much fresh water to many parts of South and Southeast Asia. So cutting off water would basically be an act of war.
1
It's correct
1
@palstime150 That's because those areas are not under the control of India, they're under the control of Pakistan. So no, the map is actually correct.
1
@palstime150 No I'm from Australia. I'm not Pakistani.
1
@palstime150 The rest of the world recognises that Kashmir is disputed between India and Pakistan and so the map is correct because it's disputed.
1
Lol he thinks he's Russian
1
IT'S CORRECT
1
@ No it's not
1
it's correct
1
@adilsheikh843 "Subcontinent" is mostly in reference to India's ethnic diversity (including Pakistan and Bangladesh were both part of India at one point). I guess what you're referring to is the tectonic plate known as the Indian plate that crashed into the Eurasian plate (consisting of most of Asia and Europe) to form the Himalayas.
1
@pete5691 Bangladesh is indeed an Asian Tiger and they have a plan to become developed by 2041, whether they reach achieve that or not, only time will tell but they have that plan in place and are using the same East Asian economic model that is also currently being used by Vietnam (another modern Asian Tiger). It is the Asian Century and China is the most powerful nation of the Asian Century. Basing a region's worth on who migrates there is not a valid argument because it's not the same across the whole world. Asian countries (whether rich or poor) have very strict immigration policies. There is a lot of inter-regional migration within Asia and most Asian countries mostly accept temporary migrants from other Asian countries. Asia has experienced tremendous economic success, China is set to become the biggest economy by 2030, India is expected to rise to #3 by the end of this decade and Indonesia is set to rise to #4 by the middle of this century. Multiple Asian countries are competing in key sectors like space exploration (China, India, Japan), robotics (China, Japan, India, Singapore, South Korea) and AI (of which China is currently ahead of the US in multiple AI sectors). A push for de-dollarisation has gained traction in Asia and Asian soft power has also risen considerably, with South Korea now competing with the US on a global scale. The biggest song in the world right now is a song by a South Korean Kpop girl group called "Cupid", the most watched series on Netflix is a South Korean series and the most used app in the world is TikTok, a Chinese app. Idolisation and fetishisation of Korean people and culture is now common place and there are people who are getting plastic surgery to look Korean/East Asian. This level of infatuation and idolisation was only ever seen with the US but now South Korea is up there too. So yeah we are in the Asian Century.
1
You mean North America and Europe because Australia and New Zealand, being Asia-Pacific nations, followed similar rules that were enforced across Asia from Japan to the small island nation of the Maldives.
1
@abba-Flammenfresser It was the end of WWII and Japan's failed invasion of India that bolstered the independence movements of the Indians and Pakistanis. The US has no hand in freeing them. India's desire independence received support from the US, Japan, Germany, France, Italy, the Soviet Union and China but that's about it.
1
@abba-Flammenfresser Firstly, I'm not from India. Secondly, I am aaware that Russia is evil and what they have done to Ukraine is abhorrent but you also need to understand that your perspective is not the same for everybody else. While the Americans were supporting the genocide of Bangladeshis in 1971 and President Nixon was making racist remarks about the Bangladeshis, it was the Soviets that gave support to the Bangladeshis. Thirdly, the US has no significant hand in providing independence to India. India and Pakistan were not two separate colonies which makes me believe you are not aware of colonial Indian history which is why you believe the US is the reason for Indian independence. The Indian independence movement was already thriving before WWII even began, it exacerbated during WWII when the Japanese invaded India and set up a puppet state known as Azad Hind which was controlled by Indian nationalists fighting for independence. By the time WWII ended, the British realised that India was a too costly to maintain control of India and that animosity between Hindus and Muslims was too high.
1
@abba-Flammenfresser Fourthly, you don't understand Indian history if you think the Americans have always been there for them. The US has always supported Pakistan, their arch enemy. In 1971, when the Bangladesh Liberation War started, the US was supporting Pakistan in its war against India. When Indian intervened and tried to stop the genocide from happening, the US sent the USS Enterprise to attack India. Fast forward to the 21st Century when India faced its deadliest terror attack committed by Pakistani terrorists, the US continued to support Pakistan. When the Bin Laden was found hiding in Pakistan in 2011, the US continued to support Pakistan. Terrorism is such a huge issue for India (it has dealt with Islamist terrorism committed by Pakistan-backed terrorists long before 9/11 happened), yet the US continues to support Pakistan. So how can you say that the US has always been there for them? India and the US have never been allies but the US and Pakistan are allies.
1
@abba-Flammenfresser Get this treatment? The US only serve its interests, they aren't the ones being hurt. The ones being hurt are the 3 million Bangladeshis that died in the genocide that the US supported that President Nixon was vocal about and staunchly anti-India. The ones being hurt are the thousands and thousands of Korean, South Asian and Southeast Asian women who were trafficked to US military bases to work as sex slaves during and after the Korean War. The ones being hurt are the Chagossian people who were expelled from their country so that the US could establish a military base on their islands. The list goes on. You need to realise that the US and Russia have both done bad things. You can't think that one side is an angel and the other side, the devil. It's not black and white like you think it is. You need to learn more about the dark side of US presence overseas and lose this idea that the US cares about the world, it doesn't. They only care when it serves their interests. That is why to this day, the US has not allowed for the temporary waiving of IP that would allow China and India to produce Pfizer and Moderna vaccines that would be given out for free to developing nations across Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Pacific. Why don't they care? It's because they gain nothing out of it and likely view the lives of the Global South as expendable.
1
@abba-Flammenfresser Firstly, I'm not from India. Secondly, I am aaware that Russia is evil and what they have done to Ukraine is abhorrent but you also need to understand that your perspective is not the same for everybody else. While the Americans were supporting the genocide of Bangladeshis in 1971 and President Nixon was making racist remarks about the Bangladeshis, it was the Soviets that gave support to the Bangladeshis. Thirdly, the US has no significant hand in providing independence to India. India and Pakistan were not two separate colonies which makes me believe you are not aware of colonial Indian history which is why you believe the US is the reason for Indian independence. The Indian independence movement was already thriving before WWII even began, it exacerbated during WWII when the Japanese invaded India and set up a puppet state known as Azad Hind which was controlled by Indian nationalists fighting for independence. By the time WWII ended, the British realised that India was a too costly to maintain control of India and that animosity between Hindus and Muslims was too high.
1
@abba-Flammenfresser The US only serve its interests, they aren't the ones being hurt. The ones being hurt are the 3 million Bangladeshis that died in the genocide that the US supported that President Nixon was vocal about and staunchly anti-India. The ones being hurt are the thousands and thousands of Korean, South Asian and Southeast Asian women who were trafficked to US military bases to work as sex slaves during and after the Korean War. The ones being hurt are the Chagossian people who were expelled from their country so that the US could establish a military base on their islands. The list goes on. You need to realise that the US and Russia have both done bad things. You can't think that one side is an angel and the other side, the devil. It's not black and white like you think it is. You need to learn more about the dark side of US presence overseas and lose this idea that the US cares about the world, it doesn't. They only care when it serves their interests. That is why to this day, the US has not allowed for the temporary waiving of IP that would allow China and India to produce Pfizer and Moderna vaccines that would be given out for free to developing nations across Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Pacific. Why don't they care? It's because they gain nothing out of it and likely view the lives of the Global South as expendable.
1
@chaosXP3RT I'll try to explain. The US has always supported India's enemy, Pakistan. Pakistan and the US developed close relationships in 1954 and the US has since then supported Pakistan. In the 1971 war, the US supported Pakistan against India. When the preceding Bangladeshi genocide occurred in 1971, the US supported Pakistan's genocide of the Bangladeshis and encouraged the transfer of arms from the Middle East to Pakistan so that the Pakistanis could use them against the Bangladeshis. The Indians were on the side of the Bangladeshis. President Nixon, of the time, was staunchly pro-Pakistan and anti-India and infamously made racist remarks about the Bangladeshis when the genocide was happening. Relations between Pakistan and the US continued to remain warm even when the War of Terror began. when India faced its deadliest terror attack at the hands of Pakistani terrorists, the US continued to support Pakistan and in 2011, when Bin Laden was found hiding in Pakistan, the US continued to support Pakistan. In the eyes of the Indians, the US has never been on their side. So, when you think about it, it is kind of a surprise that India has tried to develop better ties with the US in the 21st century despite being treated wrongly by the Americans throughout most of their time as an independent nation.
1
@kimjaiprakashudhaiwala141 Comments like yours (every single one in this thread) are the reason why anti-Indian sentiment thrives in Asia. I don't know why you can't simply observe without malice.
1
@uzochiokeke4328 India and all of those countries are wrong. Nobody likes bullies.
1
@Tounguepunchfartbox No, people here just want peace. Nobody wants an arms race and the militarisation of Asia and the Pacific. The last thing we want to hear of is of an "Asian arms race". I respectfully disagree, allying with a power that is not within the Indo-Pacific does not make sense because at the end of the day, when things turn sour we are the ones who will suffer greatly not the foreign power located on the other side of the world who is far away from the damage. We need cooperation. The truth of the matter is regardless of our personal feelings, China is part of this region and the region needs to learn to get along with China. You can still cooperate even if you don't agree on things. Many Asian and Pacific countries signed the RCEP with China so that's proof we can cooperate. As I said before, nobody wants to become a pawn between the US and China. We want to cooperate with both, we don't want to be pushed around and forced to pick sides.
1
@Tounguepunchfartbox Nobody wants to solely side with the US and get caught up in a war between the US and China. At the end of the day, the US and China don't care who gets hurt as long as they win. Look at Ukraine. I've said what I've said.
1
@Tounguepunchfartbox I fully understand what you're saying. I just don't think it's a viable option for any Asia-Pacific country.
1
Huh???
1
it's correct
1
@雷-t3j Global South is in reference to the developing world (composed of middle income and low income nations - consists of most of Asia, most of Africa, most of Latin America, the Pacific and parts of Eastern Europe). Global North refers to the developed world (composed of high income nations - the definition is subjective but always includes Western Europe, Canada, the US, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, Singapore and Israel). In the case of IP waiving, it was the governments of developed Western nations, Japan, Singapore and a few others that refused to waive IP. Most of the governments of the developing world supported the temporary waiving of IP. The current war in Ukraine has also exacerbated the divide between Global North and Global South. All Global North nations have supported sanctions against Russia, whereas the Global South hasn't. Unfortunately, this is the result of the Cold War where Russia (Soviet Union) was sympathetic and supportive of struggles in the Global South whereas the Global North (led by the US) was not. Many in the Global South fear that picking a side in the war will result in consequences. They fear that siding with the US will ruin their relationship with Russia and thus they will have nobody to support them in their own struggles. They also fear that picking a side will open their countries up to proxy wars and become pawns between the US and Russia like what has happened to Ukraine (also based on their past experiences, the conflicts of the Cold War era backed by either the US or the USSR were fought in Global South nations).
1
Do you think "brown people" are all the same? Do you think "brown people" are an group with a common ancestral heritage? If your answer is "yes", then you must be an American.
1
Had no idea Pakistanis, Mexicans, Filipinos, Tongans, Tunisians, Indians, Dominicans etc. were all the same.
1
Wouldn't be surprised if that becomes truer and truer as each day goes by because the Ukraine War has generated significant cracks in the world.
1
@captainalex157 India's real opportunity is going down the drain because the US is never going to let India develop. Adani's collapse at the hands of a small American firm is ruining confidence in India's market for international investors and just yesterday, George Soros made comments hoping for regime change in India (as well as China), making references to Adani's collapse and Modi. India has no real opportunity to rise up if they let others step all over them.
1
@dsnodgrass4843 Everything you said applies to the United States too, not just them
1
Northeast Indian people don't look Chinese or Japanese and Northeast India is very undeveloped. My lord, I'm not even Indian and yet I know more about your country.
1
It was about immigration
1
@possiblyzero3582 India is the way that it is because it's constantly looking outwards instead of inwards.
1
@ThatBasedGuy Singapore will NEVER choose. K. Shanmugam, Singapore's Minister of Home Affairs infamously said in 2022 that Singapore will never pick a side even if it came to it. It will do everything it can to remain neutral.
1
@possiblyzero3582 China has had border disputes with multiple other Asian countries that have been resolved such as its former disputes with Tajikistan, Nepal and Myanmar. The China-India border dispute is simply unresolved and China has attempted to make land compromises with India but India has refused. What did happen though was a breakthrough last week when China and India decided to pull back troops from the border giving end to a 4 year stalemate. That breakthrough is quite significant because it also paves the way for India to accept Chinese investments, which has been discussed for a long time. The Indians are finally realising for their success, they need Chinese economic assistance because most things are made in or sourced from China. So I wouldn't say China is trying to circumvent India, in fact Chinese state media has continuously prayed for India to "wake up", which is why Chinese state media praised the border breakthrough last week. Two countries can work together even if they don't see eye to eye on everything.
1
@possiblyzero3582 Thanks for you reply. So the Myanmar dispute was resolved in the 1950s and involved both nations ceding small pieces of land to one another, China ended up recognising that most of the disputed territory as Burmese territory. China initially claimed the entirety of northern Kachin region and wanted to control it due to the KMT using it as a base. In regards to Tajikistan, Tajikistan ended a 130 year dispute with China by ceding 200km2 to China whilst China relinquished claims to over 28,000 km2 of Tajikistani territory. It was not done for economic reasons. China has given India the option of land compromise but India has continuously refused to accept anything. China once offered India a deal where China would keep Aksai China while India can keep Arunachal Pradesh but India refused. This was offered in 1960 and has been offered numerous times since. India has refused every single time.
1
@possiblyzero3582 I wouldn't say India wants to dethrone China economically, even the most nationalistic person in India will know that that is simply not possible. China has a much larger economic output than India and India's current economic growth rate of 6% does not compare to China's 9.5% that it pulled decades before. What India wants is a multipolar Asia in which China is not the sole dominant power in Asia, something that China has alluded to agreeing with. There is no debt trap by the way. People bring up Sri Lanka but a close look at Sri Lanka's debt situation will show that the country owes most of its debt to Western-backed institutions. In fact, Sri Lanka has managed to get out of bankruptcy, albeit with a price of extremely high living standards, because of the IMF's stringent austerity measures. It's not China behind any of this.
1
@karanvarma5789 No that's not the case at all. President Nixon who was a staunch pro-Pakistan and anti-India president, was from the Republican party. US presidents have never been pro-India because they've always been pro-Pakistan. Donald Trump is the closest you'll get to a pro-India US president. It has nothing to do with Republican or Democrat parties.
1
That has nothing to do with geopolitics
1
@joelsherpa2187 Exactly. Nepal wants to diversify so as to not rely on one country.
1
@Gizziiusa There is a difference between economic clout and political clout. It would be seen as detrimental to many ethnic Chinese in countries like Thailand, Philippines, Laos and Cambodia to be treated as PRC Chinese and thus viewed as outsiders. The ethnic Chinese communities of all Thailand, Philippines and Cambodia are deeply assimilated into their respective countries. Ethnic Chinese in Thailand and Cambodia practice Thai and Khmer culture, speak Thai and Khmer practice Theravada Buddhism and see themselves as "Thai" and "Khmer". The same thing in the Philippines, ethnic Chinese in the Philippines are embedded within the native Filipino culture with most practicing Catholicism and speaking the native Filipino languages. Malaysia is the only exception, where the local Chinese community has retained its Chinese cultural heritage albeit developed it into a unique Southeast Asian-style Chinese identity with some additional influences from the Malay and Indian communities but nonetheless, culturally and ethnically consider themselves as "Han Chinese". Due to Malaysia's long history of ethnic disharmony, there is a large fraction of the Malaysian Chinese community who find more allegiance with China than with Malaysia and this section of the community are constantly questioned about their loyalty with fears that if relations between Malaysia and China deteriorated considerably, this section of the Chinese community would immediately side with China rather than their birth country.
1
@Toon_With_Tune Don't speak in Hindi, Idk that language!
1
@Toon_With_Tune I don't know Hindi, all I see are random Latin letters and it looks like some Indian language
1
@Toon_With_Tune Did I say it was the only Indian language? No.
1
@Toon_With_Tune I'm not Pakistani, I'm Australian. I know it's Hindi because I am interested in Indian culture and I know that's Hindi. I know a lot about India, hence why I replied to your comment. I know for a fact that that is not a South Indian or Northeast Indian language. It's Hindi and most of the people who talk about the "correct map of India" are from the Hindi belt. I never see South Indians or Northeast Indians who say that. So yeah it's Hindi. Anything else you want to say or are we done here?
1
@JackSardonic East Asian nations, Singapore and dare I say the Gulf Arab nations are way better than any nation located in Europe tbf
1
More US military bases? Absolutely not. To establish a US military base, countries are asked to sign a SOFA and the SOFA always includes clauses that override the laws of the country that is signing the agreement. It's not fair for local people to be caught up in the USA's desire to maintain hegemony. This is why there is severe anti-US military sentiment on Okinawa, Japan. Not to mention the fact that the native Chagossian people of Chagos Archipelago were expelled from their country so that the US could set up a military base on the country with the assistance of the UK. So no, we do not need more US military bases because it's always the local people that suffer. Plus, China doesn't have a plethora of military bases around the world like the US has, so why does the US need more?
1
@ZontarDow Are we living in the same reality cause all I see is the Global South increasingly backing Russia
1
@god_slayer-restart You must be Muslim
1
You should move to one of those countries. 🥰
1
@deepakthakur1610 No the Kra canal should not be built because it will completely ruin the economy of Singapore which plays a huge role in facilitating trade that passes through the Strait of Malacca. There is opposition in Singapore and Malaysia to the Kra canal because of the damage it could do the economies of both nations.
1
@deepakthakur1610 Yeah but then all of the trade will pass through the Kra canal. Nobody will ever want to traverse the seas of the Strait of Malacca and go to Singapore. At the end of the day, the number of ships that dock in Singapore will diminish. It'll be so much easier and less time consuming to go straight through the Kra canal and directly into the Gulf of Thailand and then into the South China Sa. Right now, all ships dock in Singapore and move through the Natuna Sea and into the South China Sea when they travel upwards to East Asia. The Kra canal will also turn the entire Malay peninsula (of which half of Malaysia lies on) into an island as it will be cut off completely from the Asian mainland. There is opposition to that.
1
Oh Sri Lanka, the country that Singapore's own Lee Kuan Yew marvelled at for its potential and strong foundations for future success but just simply could never truly overcome the destruction from its era of systematic ethnic violence. Mr Lee was right to lament at the destruction of Sri Lanka and what it could have been in one of his final books before his timely death.
1
@lougerone Oh my days, the territory is disputed. The map depicts the territory that India control and the territory China controls. Stop torturing us with your "use correct map" nonsense. The map is CORRECT
1
No he's not Russian
1
Yep and China wants control over all of those regions and they've done a lot to cement their position as one of the main powers.
1
@illliiiiillliii6265 None of that is true. Global South is a synonym for the developing world (middle income and low income nations). China, India, Russia have all used the term to describe it.
1
@dahut_ Plenty of nations in the Global South are civilised. None of you actually understand the term. In the world, there are three different economic brackets for nations: high income, middle income and low income. "Global South" is a term to describe middle income and low income nations, whilst Global North is a term to describe high income nations.
1
@MattSinz It's just a term to describe middle income and low income nations. Many nations in the Global South are newly industrialised.
1
@baneofbanes Nixon supported the genocide of Bangladeshis and gave full support to Pakistan.
1
@ritemolawbks8012 To be fair, the European Union is Western and thus culturally similar to the US. The EU is also not a country and many European nations are part of NATO. Russia was ideologically/culturally different to the US and Japan was culturally different to the US despite being a democratic nation. The idea that India challenging the economic position of the US in the future won't lead to a confrontation between the two countries doesn't sound very plausible in my opinion. The talk of the Asian Century (especially in regards to the rise of China and India) has drawn out negative commentary in the US and the fact that Indian and Chinese IT workers were threatened with violence in Texas because of the belief that Indians and Chinese are taking all of the IT jobs is a testament to what could happen. It's just like what happened to Japanese/East Asian workers in the US when they were targeted during the 1980s. I hope this won't be the case but it's kind of hard to tell, especially with how things are in the world today.
1
@ritemolawbks8012 Modi and Trump were close so I would say that's the reason why. Also, many Indian Americans are of North Indian origin. However, I don't think many Indians (outside of North India) actually like him. I have Indian friends who come from South India and they said that Modi is not popular at all in the southern states. This is because Modi is more of a Hindu nationalist and Hindu nationalism isn't a thing in South India. Nobody in South India also speaks Hindi so they feel really disconnected culturally and politically from Modi and the North Indian Modi supporters. Yeah I agree, the relationship between the two countries would have to be equal. Also, I agree with your points on the UN Security Council. The UN Security Council is severely outdated. France shouldn't even be there anymore. The idea that Western Europe is still important in geopolitics today is incorrect in my opinion. The international geopolitical landscape has shifted significantly to Asia and the emerging economies in Asia, Africa and Latin America are the ones that are experiencing the highest economic growth in the world. These economies will eventually take a seat at the table and I think the UN Security Council needs to change. The veto rule is also very problematic in my opinion.
1
@ritemolawbks8012 Yeah you're right. The veto rule basically protects all those on the UN Security Council. No, I'm not in India, I'm actually not of Indian descent but I like to read about and keep up with Asian and Pacific geopolitics because I live in Australia.
1
lol
1
@yaldabaoth2 There is literally nothing democratic about the UNSC. Be serious 💀
1
Pakistan has been allied with the West (specifically the US) since independence. It pretended to be a partner in the War of Terror, hid the world's most wanted man Osama Bin Laden, gave rise to the Taliban and is linked to various terrorist groups. What exactly has it done to benefit the West?
1
@johney3734 Uh no it's not. They haven't been able to stop anything.
1
I don't think they have an issue but even if they did, there's nothing they can do about it. The Andaman and Nicobar Islands are part of India and the surrounding waters are part of India's EEZ.
1
@winstonsmith1271 I don't think there are any diplomatic tools to hinder the project. I don't think they have anything because it's all within India's EEZ so legally India can do anything they want because the islands are under their jurisdiction and the Convention of the Law of the Sea allows this. Myanmar is also close to both India and China and India and China are some of the largest foreign suppliers for the Tatmadaw (the military that is controlling Myanmar). You may recall the Rohingya genocide in late 2017. The reason why Myanmar still manages to stand today without any embarrassment or remorse, despite backlash from the international community, is because India and China turned a blind eye to what was happening back then. Both countries have significant influence in the country. That's why back then, Western powers said that for anything to change in Myanmar you need to get India and China on board. As for Thailand, both India and Thailand perform maritime drills using their navies together in the Andaman Sea.
1
@fx125320 Crimea was annexed in 2014, it was then made a province of Russia and has been so since 2014. So I suppose it's because it's older.
1
@Doyourbest4245 and who are these "people who are like me" you speak of?
1
@qabeelbinadam Balkanisation
1
They've been talking about the Asian Century for a long time and I think the 2022 Russian Invasion of Ukraine really laid down the foundation for the political landscape of the Asian Century. It's a world that is now "Western" (US and NATO and its allies) and "Eastern" (led by China, India and Russia with its partners).
1
The person who created this video is literally Asian. He's from an Asian country (Azerbaijan).
1
@hijazlander So? What has that got to do with what is being discussed here?
1
@hijazlander The OP spoke about Europeans and lacking knowledge on Asia and yet the person who created the video is from an Asian country, not a European country. That's why I posted my comment, read the OP's comment. Also, everything he said appears to be true or are you telling me that Pakistan is not suffering?
1
@goeast12 You are correct and I see the point you are making, especially when the whole "Asian Values" ideology was taught in Singaporean schools in order to cultivate a national identity. It only worked because everybody was from some Asian culture. Having said that, I think New Zealand is exemplary of successful multiculturalism. Not only does it have a mix of people of different European, Asian and Pacific origin with smaller numbers of people from the "Middle Eastern, Latin American or African (MELAA)" category, its indigenous population (Maori) are well represented members of New Zealand identity. The predominantly dual mix of European + Maori cultures as the foundation of New Zealand identity is probably part of the reason why it has been successful.
1
What everybody is thinking across Asia and the Pacific is if the US will actually support any nation that is attacked by China. The Trump presidency initiated the so called "US retreat" after failing to take any interest in any major Asia-Pacific summit. Under Biden, Afghanistan happened. The disaster of Afghanistan was a reminder to the rest of Asia of what also happened in Vietnam. Two major failures in Asia. The disaster of Afghanistan reinforced views across the region that the US is likely not going to be there to provide any support. I've seen your view espoused by other Americans but not a single person in Asia and the Pacific has expressed the same thing because the cold truth is that many in the region now believe that they can't rely on the US anymore. The viral news reports of American double standards in how they treated the Afghanis and groups from the Global South has also generated discussion of "Western hypocrisy" in Asia.
1
@29pcs The term is South Asia, cry harder. Stop making everything about India.
1
@YashSharma-iv7ok Australia, why?
1
@YaSunny0409 Except it's not. What Xi meant was a direct jab at the US for their interest in the Asian region. It was his way of trying to gag the US by saying it's not an Asian nation and thus should not be involved in Asian affairs. China isn't trying to create a pan-Asian empire like Japan did
1
@YaSunny0409 Not true
1
The brown people in the UK are mostly Indians from what I know and they, along with the Chinese, actually outperform ethnic English people. Cry
1
You put "America bad" in quotation marks as if it's a lie when in reality, it's the truth. There is no "good" and "bad" in all of this. Everybody is to some degree good and bad. I think you're also severely underestimating China. I live in the Asia-Pacific and let me tell you, Chinese influence is everywhere. China is so influential that they are influencing institutions like universities and governments in countries like Australia and Thailand.
1