Reluctance to Join Initiative Not Good for Indian Economy

Posted by AsiaViews | Jan 2, 2018 | 0 |

China Daily

25 Dec 2017
In contrast to the majority of the international community supporting or being involved in the China-proposed Belt and Road Initiative, India still prefers to ignore it.

The issue featured at the 20th round of border talks between Chinese and Indian special representatives in New Delhi on Friday, too, according to Indian media reports. Regular dialogue between the two sides at the high level will help them bridge their differences in such fields as the border issue and India’s participation in the Belt and Road Initiative.

India’s resistance seems to stem from its concern over the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, which is designed to pass through Kashmir, a disputed territory between India and Pakistan. But India needs to realize the CPEC is simply an economic project and there is no change in China’s neutral stance on the Kashmir issue.

Since Beijing has no intention of playing any geopolitical game while promoting the Belt and Road Initiative in the region, New Delhi has no reason to view the CPEC, a flagship project of the China-proposed initiative, as anything but a connectivity and infrastructure endeavor for mutual benefit.

It wouldn’t take much for India, if it indeed tries, to see the huge opportunities for better connectivity and economic cooperation the initiative offers to participating countries. China has been reiterating the initiative is a cross-continental development and cooperation platform, not a political tool, which focuses on providing regional public service.

Given today’s interdependent world, India could miss the economic bus because of its skepticism while other countries reap the fruits of the Belt and Road Initiative.

On the bilateral level, India hopes to improve ties and deepen economic cooperation with China. So it should not ignore the initiative, as it is a mutually beneficial means to deepen cooperation, which in turn will help improve overall bilateral ties.

(source:http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201712/25/WS5a40471ea31008cf16da3324.html)

About The Author

AsiaViews

Leave a reply Cancel reply

Neigborhood Watch

Subscribe To Newsletter

POINTS TO PONDER

EXTRICATING NDONESIAN CHILDREN FROM ISIS INFLUENCE ABROAD

Indonesia urgently needs to revisit the possibility of repatriating the neediest of its young citizens stranded abroad, whose families had earlier joined ISIS. Most of these children are in camps in northern Syria but there are also small numbers in the Philippines, Afghanistan and Iraq. “Extricating Indonesian Children from ISIS Influence Abroad”, the latest report from the Institute for Policy Analysis of Conflict (IPAC) argues that the government could begin by bringing back small groups of unaccompanied children under ten years of age, who pose minimal security risk and are most vulnerable to deteriorating conditions in the camps.“The problem is that health and security conditions are worsening by the day in the Syrian camps, and the children are growing older,” says Dyah Kartika, IPAC analyst. “They need access to schools, a nurturing environment, and medical attention. If the government waits too long, the children will be further exposed to ISIS ideology.” The new report examines a 2019 list of Indonesians in camps and prisons run by the Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). The Indonesian government has been trying to verify their citizenship, but with pseudonyms, misspellings and bad transliterations, it is a daunting task. At the time the data was collected, between March and June 2019, there were 555 Indonesians in SDF camps and prisons, including 367 children. Among the children, approximately 277 were under the age of ten and 34 were unaccompanied. In June 2021, there are fewer than ten children who are both unaccompanied and under the age of ten that could be prioritized for return. Bringing back children of ISIS families is no easy task. The report analyses the main challenges faced by the Indonesian government. These include definitional issues, bureaucratic competition, the difficulty of verifying nationality, evaluating the toll of exposure to conflict, assessing security risk, and finding relatives or others willing to provide care once the children are returned. In addition, COVID has meant stringent restrictions on travel, placing further obstacles in the way of repatriation. There are several models for rehabilitation of children exposed to violent extremism in Indonesia that could be modified to accommodate the needs of children repatriated from abroad. The report examines these models and argues that the government does not need to have every detail of rehabilitation programs in place before it starts extricating children from ISIS influence. It can start by bringing back the most vulnerable children and then modify programs as needed.

“It’s important that the government see these children as victims” says Dyah. “They deserve a chance to be children again.”

Reluctance to Join Initiative Not Good for Indian Economy