For thousands of years Indiaand China were great peace-loving neighbors. Till 1950, they did not wageany wars. It is among other things, due to the rich cultural heritage and deep religious convictions. Over centuries, great soulslike Confuciusinfluenced our thinking process inIndia to enrich our perceptions.
Fa-hien, a Chinese pilgrim, visited India during the reign of Chandra Gupta II. His primary aim was to visit the Buddhist religious places and to take with him the copies of the Buddhist religious texts. He, therefore, travelled through the Gupta empire and also wrote down his impressions about India. As his main interest was religion, we know nothing about the political condition of India from his account. However, his account helps us to know something about the social and religious condition of that period.
Fa-hien started his voyage to India in 399 A.D. He travelled through the desert of Gobi and reached Khotan where he found many Buddhist monasteries. He then visited Shanshan. The then ruler of Kasagara was a Buddhist. Therefore, he met Buddhist monks. After that, he crossed the Pamir plateau, Swat and entered Gandhara Pradesh.
In 1938, after the Japanese invasion of China, the communist General Zhu De requested Jawaharlal Nehru to send some physicians to China. Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose, the President of the Indian National Congress, made an appeal to the people through a press statement on 30 June 1938. He arranged to send a team of volunteer doctors and an ambulance. Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose also wrote an article in Modern Review on Japan’s role in the Far East and denounced the assault on China. The key aspect of this mission was that it was a helping hand from a nation itself struggling for freedom, to another nation also struggling for its freedom. The mission was reinforced with Nehru’s visit to China in 1939.
Dwarka Nath Kotnis, born in a middle-class Maharashtrian family from Solapur on 10 October 1910, had then graduated from the Seth G S Medical College, Bombay and was preparing for post-graduation. He asked permission of his family to volunteer for service abroad. Dwarka Nath’s younger sister Manorama recalls that her brother wanted to travel around the world and practice medicine at different places. She said “most members of the family knew little about China at that time. We only knew that people used to come and sell Chinese silk,” While his father Shantaram encouraged young Dwarka Nath to venture out, his mother was very sad because he was going that far in a war zone.
A medical team of five doctors (Drs. M. Atal from Allahabad (who was also the leader of the mission), M. Cholkar from Nagpur, D. Kotnis from Sholapur, B.K. Basu and Debesh Mukherjee from Calcutta) was dispatched as the Indian Medical Mission Team in September 1938. All, except Dr. Kotnis, returned to India safely.
The team first arrived in China at the port of Hankou, Wuhan. They were then sent to Yan’an, the revolutionary base at the time in 1939, where they were warmly welcomed by Mao Zedong, Zhu De and other top leaders of the Communist Party, as they were the first medical team to come from another Asian country.
The 28-year-old Doctor came as a part of the five-member team and stayed in China for almost 5 years working in mobile clinics to treat wounded soldiers. In 1939, Dr. Kotnis joined the Eighth Route Army (led by Mao Zedong) at the Jin-Cha-Ji border near the Wutai Mountain Area, after his efforts all across the northern China region.
His job as a battlefront doctor was stressful, where there was always an acute shortage of medicines. In one long-drawn out battle against Japanese troops in 1940, Dr. Kotnis performed operations for up to 72 hours, without getting any sleep. He treated more than 800 wounded soldiers during the battle. He was eventually appointed as the Director of the Dr. Bethune International Peace Hospital named after the famous Canadian surgeon Norman Bethune.
In 1940, Dr. Kotnis met Guo Qinglan, a nurse at the Bethune Hospital. They first met at the inauguration of Dr. Norman Bethune’s tomb and Guo was immediately attracted to the Indian doctor. Kotnis could write and speak Chinese, which amazed her. The couple got married in December 1941. They had a son on 23 August 1942, who was named Yinhua – meaning India (Yin) and China (Hua), at the suggestion of Nie Rongzhen.
Dr. Kotnis wrote letters to his family regularly. “He sounded very happy in the letters. People used to come to thank him for his help. He was telling the good part,” says Manorama. Every place he went in China, he described it in detail in his letters home. The whole family found them to be great fun because what he described was so different from the life in India.
The hardship of the stressful job as a front-line doctor finally started to take its toll on him and severely affected his health. Only three months after the birth of Yinhua, epilepsy struck Dr. Kotnis. A series of epileptic seizures killed him on 9 December 1942, leaving behind his widow Guo Qinglan, and the baby son.
Dr. Kotnis was buried in the Heroes Courtyard in Nanquan Village. At that time, Mao Zedong mourned his death by observing that “The army has lost a helping hand, the nation has lost a friend. Let us always bear in mind his internationalist spirit.”
It is said that he joined the Communist Party of China on 7 July 1942, just before his death, but could not be verified.
Traders were very active in both the countries. Sinceindependence of India in 1947and the fleeing of ChiangKai-shek toTaiwan (Formosa), geopolitical scenariounderwent sea changes resulting in the Indo -China war of 1962.Its repercussions weremanifold encompassing physicaland metaphysical spheres. The Indian senior minister in charge of national defence VK Krishna Menon had to resign his job, Nehruhad his own worst period inhis lifeas a world leader, Prime Minister and evenas aperson resulting in his sad demise.
Since 1991—India-China Growth Story
Both countries have gotdifferent political systems. While India is said to have a vibrant democracy— the largest democracy inthe world, China has the centralized one-party ruling system. It provides China withmany advantages liketotal controlover thepopulation with maximum discipline. There are no strikes or hartals or work stoppages in China. But India hasa preponderance of such amenace. Interms ofpopulation,China and India together account for nearly half ofthe humanbeings living in the world. India may surpass China with in a couple decadesunless conscious efforts are madein India now itself. This is achallenge to the Indian policy makers and even politicians alike.
During 1991 both the countries had opened up the economies to the world, but in different ways.India opened up theeconomy almost blindly, whileChina was openingits economyvery carefully to avoid any backlash.Today we would be surprisedto see that there are seven Indian companies in the 500 Global Fortune list. China has 120such companies to our utter surprise.
China beats India in every criticalparameter like GDP, Percapita Income, International patents, ForeignExchange Reserves,manufacturing out puts, Foreign trade, poverty reduction, life expectancy, healthcare, etc.If werewind our memory, in 1991, both India and China wereat the same levelson allthese parameters. It is worth examining such an astounding divergencein progressor changed outcome. It was achievedby China on account of its totalcontrol over many crucial parameterslike finance, businesses, media, technology, politicians, military, farming, national resources, corruption. As against the above,it seems India has amajor Americaninfluenceover the above parameters.
Recent Spat Between India and China in Historical Perspective
In 1913–14, representatives of Britain, China, and Tibet attended a conference in Shimla, India and drew up an agreement concerning Tibet’s status and borders. The McMahon Line, a proposed boundary between Tibet and India for the eastern sector, was drawn by British negotiator Henry McMahon on a map attached to the agreement. All three representatives initialled the agreement, but Beijing soon objected to the proposed Sino-Tibet boundary and repudiated the agreement, refusing to sign the final, more detailed map. After approving a note which stated that China could not enjoy rights under the agreement unless she ratified it, the British and Tibetan negotiators signed the Shimla Convention and more detailed map as a bilateral accord. Neville Maxwell states that McMahon had been instructed not to sign bilaterally with Tibetans if China refused, but he did so without the Chinese representative present and then kept the declaration secret.
V. K. Singh argues that the basis of these boundaries, accepted by British India and Tibet, were that the historical boundaries of India where the Himalayas and the areas south of the Himalayas were traditionally Indian and associated with India. The high watershed of the Himalayas was proposed as the border between India and its northern neighbours. India’s government held the view that the Himalayas were the ancient boundaries of the Indian subcontinent and thus should be the modern boundaries of British India and later the Republic of India.
Chinese boundary markers, including one set up by the newly created Chinese Republic, stood near Walong until January 1914, when T. O’Callaghan, an assistant administrator of North East Frontier Agency (NEFA)’s eastern sector, relocated them north to locations closer to the McMahon Line (albeit still South of the Line). He then went to Rima, met with Tibetan officials, and saw no Chinese influence in the area.
By signing the Shimla Agreement with Tibet, the British had violated the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, in which both parties were not to negotiate with Tibet, “except through the intermediary of the Chinese Government”, as well as the Anglo-Chinese Convention of 1906, which bound the British government “not to annex Tibetan territory.” Because of doubts concerning the legal status of the accord, the British did not put the McMahon Line on their maps until 1937, nor did they publish the Shimla Convention in the treaty record until 1938. Rejecting Tibet’s 1913 declaration of independence, China argued that the Shimla Convention and McMahon Line were illegal and that Tibetan government was merely a local government without treaty-making powers. In 1947, Tibet requested that India recognize Tibetan authority in the trading town of Tawang, south of the McMahon Line. Tibet did not object to any other portion of the McMahon line. In reply, the Indians asked Tibet to continue the relationship on the basis of the previous British Government.
The British records show that the Tibetan government’s acceptance of the new border in 1914 was conditional on China accepting the Shimla Convention. Since the British were not able to get an acceptance from China, Tibetans considered the McMahon line invalid. Tibetan officials continued to administer Tawang and refused to concede territory during negotiations in 1938. The governor of Assam asserted that Tawang was “undoubtedly British” but noted that it was “controlled by Tibet, and none of its inhabitants have any idea that they are not Tibetan.” During World War II, with India’s east threatened by Japanese troops and with the threat of Chinese expansionism, British troops secured Tawang for extra defence.
China’s claim on areas south of the McMahon Line, encompassed in the NEFA, were based on the traditional boundaries. India believes that the boundaries China proposed in Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh have no written basis and no documentation of acceptance by anyone apart from China. Indians argue that China claims the territory on the basis that it was under Chinese imperial control in the past, while Chinese argue that India claims the territory on the basis that it was under British imperial control in the past. The last Qing emperor’s 1912 edict of abdication authorised its succeeding republican government to form a union of “five peoples, namely, Manchus, Han Chinese, Mongols, Muslims, and Tibetans together with their territory in its integrity.” However, the practice that India does not place a claim to the regions which previously had the presence of the Mauryan Empire and Chola Dynasty, but which were heavily influenced by Indian culture, further complicates the issue.
India’s claim line in the eastern sector follows the McMahon Line. The line drawn by McMahon on the detailed 24–25 March 1914 Shimla Treaty maps clearly starts at 27°45’40″N, a trijunction between Bhutan, China, and India, and from there, extends eastwards. Most of the fighting in the eastern sector before the start of the war would take place immediately north of this line. However, India claimed that the intent of the treaty was to follow the main watershed ridge divide of the Himalayas based on memos from McMahon and the fact that over 90% of the McMahon Line does in fact follow the main watershed ridge divide of the Himalayas. They claimed that territory south of the high ridges here near Bhutan (as elsewhere along most of the McMahon Line) should be Indian territory and north of the high ridges should be Chinese territory. In the Indian claim, the two armies would be separated from each other by the highest mountains in the world.
During and after the 1950s, when India began patrolling this area and mapping in greater detail, they confirmed what the 1914 Shimla agreement map depicted: six river crossings that interrupted the main Himalayan watershed ridge. At the westernmost location near Bhutan north of Tawang, they modified their maps to extend their claim line northwards to include features such as Thag La ridge, Longju, and Khinzemane as Indian territory. Thus, the Indian version of the McMahon Line moves the Bhutan-China-India trijunction north to 27°51’30″N. India would claim that the treaty map ran along features such as Thag La ridge, though the actual treaty map itself is topographically vague (as the treaty was not accompanied with demarcation) in places, shows a straight line (not a watershed ridge) near Bhutan and near Thag La, and the treaty includes no verbal description of geographic features nor description of the highest ridges.
In the ancient Chinese game of Go, clever players ignore little battles in favour of strategic plays. Leaving local disputes unresolved means that later, when the game tightens and the enemy is off-guard, you can snatch prizes at lower cost. AfterChina grabbed Tibet, the world’s two most populous countries have played a similar game. However, trade thrived, between the two Asian giants.
Mostly these claims, over some 130,000 square kilometers on either side of their 3,488km-long border, have not mattered much. Despite a Chinese “lesson-teaching” invasion in 1962, rare armed skirmishes and less rare fisticuffs between patrols, the border zone has remained relatively calm. Much of it is too rugged and empty to fight over. So long as neither side shifts the status quo, what difference does it make if there are no proper markers on long stretches of border, but instead just a fuzzy “Line of Actual Control” – LAC!?
There is a kind of uneasiness between India and China despitethe peripheral calmand cosmetic diplomacyhypes at timesfor a long time. A strongIndia isnot in theagenda of China nor in the agenda ofPakistan or America. They want allits potential rivals at bay. It may be better to recall thatin 2012 Russian GDP grew at1000 percentin a decade.America crafted and created the Ukraine problems. In 1980s Japan came under severe attack after Japanesecars started challenging American car manufactures.
That is why theChinese always says, “hideyour strength andabide foryour time”.Huawei and a dozen others had thebitter experience with theAmerican arm twisting.
America has opened up its jobmarket forIndians and India did well in opening up its economy almost unconditionally to the American market. In the process, theUS got access to 1.3billion customers. It is very clearthat there won’tbe any funding forthcoming for funding Indian version of Intel, Microsoft,Google, Facebook, Amazon, etc. For America or for that matter anycountry any ally is notindispensable.They are disposable as per convenience. From 1947 to1992 the UScourted Pakistan andopposed India. After the collapse of theUSSR, US dumped Pakistanand Afghanistan. In1972 tofight the USSR,America became verypally with China.One must recall historythat Hitler was fundedby theWallstreet. All Nazi scientistswere broughtto America underseveral coversand they allgot top jobs in NASSA. Here the aimwas to fight Russia. From 1970to 1980 SaddamHussein wasused byAmerica to fight Iran.Once hisuse was over then it wanted to dump him or liquidate him. From 2011to 2020 US armed AlQuaeda, ISIS, etc., toattack Assad of Syria.
It is veryclear that America doesnot have anypermeant friends or enemies sois the casewith China.India should not be under anyillusion, thatthe US wouldbe its deliverer.
India and China should not be enemies to suit the geopolitical designs of any one.We must freeze borderdisputes andfocus on growth, trade andpeace. India shouldnot goto war foolishly to serve the sinister designs of others.A war now withChina is thefoolhardiest thingto doas we would kill the SDGs ofthe UN and a nuclear war is for total annihilation of the humanity with untold misery.Prudence demands better counsel.
India is Aggrieved
It goes withoutsaying that the Indian psyche is wounded and bruised very badly as its land isgrabbed and its soldiers murdered by the Chinese without any provocations. The Indian Prime Minister stoutly denies anysuch land grabbing by theChinese at all. It looks funny. If so, why allthis hueand cry?However, therewas a midnight operation in the most primitive and barbaric way of man slaughtering which even barbarians wouldshy away to do these days. India lost nearly 20 soldiers includingvery seniorlevel military personnel.
China has “de-facto annexed disputed territory” and that “the restoration of the status quo ante (the previously existing state of affairs) is now impossible unless the Chinese withdraw,” which would involve a loss of face and is unlikely.
“The restoration of the status quo ante is now impossible unless the Chinese withdraw, which would involve a loss of face and also looks unlikely given the equipment they have brought in and the construction activity they have started there. If India meekly accepts the new reality as the PM’s statement implies, he has, it is undoubtedly a setback.”
China says like Tibet there are very many other Chinese regions which India is keeping under its sovereignty. China feels the sheer look of the physical features of the terrainand the skin color of the people justify their claim.Admittedly it is a foolish argument and logic.The annexation ofTibet was ahistorical blunder which India had conceded due to reasons best known to the Indian leaders and diplomats.
China has skillfully cultivatedalmost all our neighbors by offering generous finical assistance and technical collaborations. Sri Lankahad to concedeto the Chinesedemands to surrender itsown ports for theChinese operation on long term lease.
In 2013 China declaredthe historic One BeltOne Road concept torevive thetraditional silk route. This silk road passes through some 70 countries.Thus, OBOR is aimedat isolatingIndia totally and with aview to winningover its neighborslike Afghanistan, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Maldives, Myanmar, and Bangladesh. Many of the Chinese aid recipients are caught unawaresthat they are like riding a tiger little knowing as how to get down without being eaten by the tiger.
There is a big hue and cry thatIndia should boycott theChinese products.
Is it feasible to doit?Here reason must have upper hand over emotions. During 2014 Chinese investment in India was to the tune of $ 1.6 billion and it went on growing to $8 billion in 2017.Our imports from Chinais estimated at $74 billion while Indian exports was only $14 billion. Some 68 percent of the cellphones used in India are made in China. Similarly, 50 percent of the liquid fertilizers used in India owe its origin to China. If we go fortotal boycottof Chinses products, its impact on the Indianeconomy is far reaching and disastrous in terms of job losses and other parameters. It is therefore, a futile andfoolish strategy.Even otherwise the products can reach India through the ASEAN countries.
Satellite images suggest that China is building up massive forces to threaten India and if required to march forward.It is more like adeterrent atthis stageas Chinacannot dare fora suicidal war with India.They declaredthat theentire GalwanValley belongs tothem. Therecent clash is the most serious one since 1967 and as suchit assumes added significance for foreign policy observersand diplomats.
Cries are heard in India that the secretintelligence of the government was in deep slumberand such a failure mustbe investigatedthoroughly too become wiser in future.
Russia hasinitiated abehind the scene efforts todefuse the tensions. The diplomatic activism initiated by Russia since 17th June is aimed at bringing regional stability. Besides, good relations in the region arecentral forthe rise of Eurasia and the emergence of a newworld order.
It is timefor restraint.India and its political leaders of all hues shouldbehave like matured statesmen. The nasty rhetoric must be toned down coupled with thecall for economic boycott. Cheap rhetoric is only to make us to use cheap intemperatelanguage of provocations. Prudencedemands proactive approachand pragmatism.Indian history is fullof such prudence and seasoned maturity.We should not shy away from exhibiting it in abundancewith benevolence, sagacity and farsightedness. Let us recallthe old axiom price of democracy is eternal vigilance! Is India aware of this adage?
Can China Afford a war now with India?
There are very many factors which are againstChina togo for awar now. Its forces are deployed against Taiwan, South China Sea, The Philippines, Vietnam, Brunei, Indonesia and Malaysia. It requires allies toback upin any war. But sadly, enoughChina got only Pakistan and Nepalas its allies whichare incapable of doing anything tangible in a war against India.They areonly anapology for any allyin awar against India.Whereas India has verymany allies both in the westernand easternhemisphere, political and diplomatic. There is a war going on with in China among the ethnicminorities. Besides, it is still makingits claim tolegitimize its occupation of Tibet.Mongolia isanother thorn in the flesh of China. There is another calamity still staring at China dueto Covid-19 and its devastating socio-economic after effects. Global heat against China isgetting asnow balling effect as industries areleaving China, looking for stable and safe regions like India.The ongoing trade war withthe USand Australiais amajor worry for China. If awar is declared against India,China may loseits 1.35 billion consumer market leaving a sudden shock forChina to absorb that kind of ashock.China too wellknow atthis juncture that going to a war is themost stupid decision.It tantamount to committing suicide.
An Indian Diaspora’s Perspective
India needs to better respond to the current geopolitical developments including China. China is no pushover, and let’s face the reality that India has everything to lose by developing having poor relations with China. For India, falling into American influence is a wrong move, and we have seen how America has changed its influence in the region by making friends and foes for its benefit only. It is a simple philosophy that we need better neighbors than faraway relatives. In times of hardship only your neighbor will be there to help you. So, build very good relationship with your neighbor!
It is a fact that India has lost in every aspect to China, we lost 30 years of economic growth and prosperity due to self-imposed pride, misalignment of economy, and failing to face the global reality. Free trade is a past word, and America’s power has slowly begun to decay, as what we witnessed the British in the 50s. If India is to prosper, India will need to carve its own system of government to manage the economy and its people including managing the huge population, and this is the first thing to control to maintain prosperity. Second, a better managed Indian style democracy is needed, with freedom to people but yet with disciplined way of life as our parents taught us. India is in danger of falling apart if we do not build the cohesion within and outside India. So called democracy has been failing everywhere in India, because of lack of financial prudence, patronizing corrupt Parliamentarians, and government officials.
In the meantime, China’s influence has reached globally over the last 20 years. China has already roped in Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Nepal, Maldives, and Myanmar in its sphere of influence, next is Bhutan and Bangladesh. They now have naval base in Sri Lanka, and others and can easily launch strike on India from all corners in one go including from Indian Ocean, Pakistan, and now Nepal. Indian Ocean is a routine highway for their naval ships with ample stopover bases.
China is eating away every area where Indian influence was once taken for granted. So, for India to survive a new pragmatic, and win – win strategy is to be created with China. It is no shame building good neighbors with China. India-Pakistan peace is indirectly within China’s control, as Pakistan will listen to the Chinese, and India can use this to resolve all issues with Pakistan.
Look at China’s friends North Korea, Pakistan, etc. no matter what it is, China is behind them in all situations, and they trust China. Did we notice that they will never abandon their friends, in whatever situation unlike America and other western powers? That is Chinese, trust, trust. No trust, no relationship.
India needs that trust building. For China and a Chinese, a friend means a trustworthy friend. India currently for China is not trustworthy! India need to develop and earn that trust. Time and again it is proven that outside powers will only help in war for a price! Is India ready for that concession!
India needs China more than China needs India because China is now a superpower. India has a chance now to mend relations before it will be too late for India. We do not have to compete with China but we need to build good relations to be prosperous.
It is clear that India needs to take stock and find out why China has been successful. One can see how strategic Chinese is in their dealing with any country. Look at India’s Foreign Exchange rate now 76.25 to one USD, as a reflection of our economic status, and it has deteriorated so steeply over the twenty years alone! China’s is 6.8 Yuan to USD has been appreciating and stable, with trillions in reserves!
India has a lot to lose for not having close relations with China. If relations deteriorate further, China which for now have cemented their influence with India’s close neighbors, next it will begin its strategy to break India, if it is not careful. Kashmir’s fight for independence has its indirect support. Also it is possible to break India into pre British period, as it is only loose federation, and China can easily accelerate its influence with its break up strategy with Indian states, and it could begin from the North East India, where they have close border contacts with north eastern people, and will slowly infiltrate downwards deeper into other Indian states. India is only a marriage of states, and divorce is not impossible. India need to even watch if in the long run West Bengal and Bangladesh could unite to become a strong powerful state. Let us not let the Chinese do that! Let’s not forget our Maharajas days of disunity among states! India has been attacked by many invaders over the centuries because of our disunity as a nation. Let not India be divided again.
India need to have a long-term foreign relations strategy that would benefit India, and it need to change within and need to look at from others perspectives too. It needs to be humble to accept its socio-economic shortcomings, and then changes will become easier to embrace. We have a lot to learn from the Chinese in terms of productivity, innovation, above all its population’s attitude to hard work and pride as a Chinese.
India need to be practical, smart, tactical, be visionary, accept and adopt to the changes happening in the global scene. No one can deny that China is moving fast towards global supremacy. Where India wants to be? “IF YOU FACE THE RIGHT DIRECTION, THEN ALL YOU NEED TO DO IS WALKING IN THAT DIRECTION” (Buddha).
You may not agree with all that is articulated but it is a fact that 21 st Century is China’s, and Chinese history had shown why they will be and they will rule the world for centuries, as European did for several centuries. Is India capable to face a formidable China? I think India will need to be more realistic in its foreign policy. India has almost lost all of its close friends–neighbours, why because China has the money to induce their influence, and they will continue in its empire building. That’s the reality.
What mustbe done to make us move forward as a united Economic Force?
1)There is a big hue and cry in India that India should boycott the Chinese products. It is a futile and foolish strategy as the products can reach India through the ASEAN countries.
2) The diplomatic activism initiated by Russia since 17th June, is aimed at bringing regional stability. Besides, good relations in the region are central for the rise of Eurasia and the emergence of a new world order.
3) It is time for restraint. India and its political leaders of all hues should behave like matured statesmen.
4) Prudence demands proactive approach and pragmatism. Indian history is full of such prudence and seasoned maturity. We should not shy away from exhibiting it in abundance with benevolence, sagacity and farsightedness.
5) Chinese are not foolish enough to follow an ostrich policyto runinto awar with India. It has doneits introspection with regard to its strengths and weaknesses, better than India.
6) India and China should not be enemies to dance to the tune of the geopolitical designs of the sinister plots of any one. We must freeze border disputes and focus on growth, trade and peace. India should not go to war foolishly to serve the sinister designs of others. A war now with China is the most stupid thing to do as we would kill the essence of theSDGs of the UN and a nuclear war is for total annihilation of the humanity with untold misery. Prudence demands better counsel.
7) China must realize that it is no more a silly state of inconsequence. Though being called arogue state by some, China is aworld superpowerand mustact as a responsible world leader. It must command respect, not to demand it by muscle flexing.
I am thankful to my reviewers of an earlydraft and they include Mr.Kunhamboo Kannan; Dr PO Abraham; Dr John Akkara: Mr. MS Aftab: Dr.NPKurup; Mr. AK Dayanand and Mr. Kuriachan Thomas.