China optimistic on diplomatic relations with India
Chinese Ambassador to India, Xu Feihong has expressed optimism for strong diplomatic relations between the two nations. Speaking to reporters on Sunday in the eastern Indian city of Kolkata, Xu noted that the millennia of shared history between the two nations brings them beyond simple neighbourly relations.
'China and India have been civilisations for so long. We have such close cultural and historical interactions. So, why shouldn't we have good relations in the coming years,' Xu said.
Though tensions and mistrust remain, he emphasized that genuine progress necessitates more than high-level diplomacy. 'It's not only up to the governments,' he was quoted by the Times of India as saying.
Ambassador Xu's statements come against the backdrop of Beijing's recent overtures to New Delhi, to open up economic and people-to-people relations. The Asian giants have made efforts to reset ties Oover the last year, after the 2020 Galwan Valley clash along their disputed Himalayan border, in which soldiers from both sides were killed.
After extended military and diplomatic discussions, New Delhi and Beijing announced in October last year that they had reached an agreement on disengagement from areas of tension and would work towards normalizing their relations. The announcement was made on the eve of the BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia, where Chinese President Xi Jingping and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi held a comprehensive bilateral meeting, marking their first such engagement in almost five years.
In Kolkata on Sunday, Xu emphasized the importance of various groups, including think-tanks, universities, and students, as well as ordinary citizens from both sides, in fostering a positive relationship. He also highlighted the crucial understanding between Xi and Modi, which focuses on strengthening ties and keeping lines of communication open.
VIDEO | Xu Feihong (@China_Amb_India), Chinese Ambassador to India, says, "China and India have been so long civilisations. We have so close cultural and historical interactions. So, why shouldn't we have good relations in the coming years? Of course, a lot of work needs to be… pic.twitter.com/YNKDsXsdyE
In April, Xi pointed out that China and India are both ancient civilizations, major developing countries, and key members of the Global South, with both currently at a crucial stage in their modernization efforts. As a step towards the normalization of relations, Indian pilgrims will be allowed to visit a pilgrimage sites of religious significance to Hindus, Jains and Buddhists at Mount Kailash and Lake Mansarovar in Tibet, after a gap of five years.
Beijing has also called on New Delhi to restart direct flights between mainland India and China, as well as to ease visa procedures for Chinese nationals.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
2 hours ago
- Russia Today
WHISPERING GIANT: Russia's quiet power leaves the West in the dust
One of the central paradoxes of Russia's foreign policy is this: while its primary goal has always been to secure full autonomy in its decision-making, success has often hinged on the international environment in which it pursues that aim. Even today, as Russia enjoys a degree of internal stability unmatched in the past 25 years, global shifts are helping shape the country's ability to resist what can only be described as the increasingly destructive efforts of the collective West. Chief among these global changes is the unmistakable decline of Western Europe's centrality in world affairs. Though the region still remains geographically and symbolically important – given its proximity to Russia and its alignment with the United States – it has lost the capacity to act as an independent player in global politics. Simply put, Western Europe no longer matters as much. It is no longer the center of decision-making or initiative, but a stage on which others perform. The true centers of gravity today are countries like China and India. Their behavior no longer forms the 'background noise' of international affairs – it drives global developments. For Russia, this transformation is both a strategic opportunity and a conceptual challenge. On the one hand, it liberates Moscow from the old and often fruitless task of seeking allies within the West to safeguard its interests, particularly along its most dangerous frontiers. On the other hand, it compels Russia to reconsider the nature of its role in the world. What does global responsibility look like for a nation whose foreign policy has never been driven by messianic ideals or the desire to impose its values on others? Historically, Russia's strategic posture has not been animated by ideological expansionism. Unlike the Western European colonial empires, Russia never pursued dominance over distant territories to extract resources or spread its worldview. Even during the height of its imperial strength, such as in the 19th-century annexation of Central Asia, the Russian Empire did not develop a colonial policy comparable to that of Britain or France. The reason lies not in a lack of capacity, but in a fundamentally different orientation: Russia has always been more concerned with preserving its internal sovereignty and strategic autonomy than with exporting its model. Even the oft-cited concept of 'Moscow as the Third Rome' is misunderstood in the West. It was never a call to global proselytizing. Unlike the United States, which often ties its foreign policy to ideological missions, Russia's approach is deeply pragmatic and rooted in the idea of national self-preservation. The Soviet period, of course, was an exception. The revolutionary zeal of 1917 gave Moscow a temporary ideological edge, and during the Cold War, the USSR promoted its values as part of a broader geopolitical confrontation. But even then, ideological outreach was quickly subordinated to the central strategic aim: maintaining national stability in opposition to American-led containment. Another consistent feature of Russia's foreign policy has been the tactical use of divisions within the West. Whether confronting Sweden, Napoleonic France, or Nazi Germany, Russia always benefited from securing at least one Western partner. In the Crimean War of the 1850s and again during the Cold War, Russia suffered political setbacks in part because the Western front was unusually united. After the Cold War ended unfavorably for Moscow, Russian strategy relied on the hope that the EU would eventually drift from Washington's orbit and reclaim some degree of autonomy. That, clearly, has not happened. Internal crises, the erosion of elite leadership, and the rise of bureaucratic inertia have left Western Europe politically paralyzed. When the Ukraine crisis escalated into a military confrontation, the region's powers not only failed to act independently – they leaned even harder on the United States. This failure of EU emancipation has not strengthened Washington, however. On the contrary, Western Europe's strategic irrelevance only underscores the West's shrinking role in global affairs. That chapter of world history – where Europe stood at the helm – is now closed. Today, Russia faces a world where resistance to Western pressure no longer requires fractures within the Western alliance. What matters now is the emergence of a truly global system – one in which power is no longer concentrated in Euro-Atlantic hands. In this environment, Russia's ability to assert its interests has improved not because the West is weaker per se, but because the world is more balanced. The failure of the previous US administration to 'isolate' Russia is significant not only as a diplomatic defeat for Washington, but as evidence of this wider trend. The global South has not turned against Russia. On the contrary, many emerging powers are increasingly assertive in defining their own paths, free of Western tutelage. This structural shift works to Russia's advantage. And yet, this new reality also imposes obligations. In a world that is waiting for Russia's presence, Russia must now ask: what kind of global actor does it wish to be? This is not a question of abandoning its historical pragmatism or inward-facing strategic culture. Rather, it is about integrating that realism with the unavoidable demands of global responsibility. Unlike the missionary democracies of the West, Russia does not seek to reshape the world in its own image. But as one of the few nations capable of independent action on the global stage, it must now participate in shaping that world, not simply reacting to it. This is the conceptual challenge of the coming years. How can Russia remain true to its tradition of self-defined interest while also engaging with a multipolar world that increasingly demands initiative, leadership, and presence? The answer will not be found in grand ideological blueprints or universalist visions. It will lie, as it always has for Russia, in a careful balancing of national sovereignty with the strategic realities of a changing global article was first published by Valdai Discussion Club, translated and edited by the RT team.
Russia Today
7 hours ago
- Russia Today
‘We will go deep into Pakistan' if provoked
Indian Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar has said the root causes of New Delhi's conflict with Islamabad remain unchanged and that India is ready to strike anywhere in Pakistan if provoked by terrorist attacks. In an interview with Politico in Brussels on Monday, Jaishankar claimed that Pakistan is openly training a large number of terrorists, estimated to be in the thousands, and deploying them to carry out attacks against India. 'We are not going to live with it. So our message to them is that if you continue to do the kind of barbaric acts which they did in April, then there is going to be retribution, and that retribution will be against the terrorist organizations and the terrorist leadership,' he said. 'And we don't care where they are. If they are deep in Pakistan, we will go deep into Pakistan.' He was referring to the recent military showdown with Pakistan, in which India launched strikes on suspected terrorist facilities in Pakistan-controlled territory on May 7 in response to a terrorist attack in Indian-administered Kashmir in April. The hostilities ended on May 10 when a ceasefire was announced. In the Politico interview, Jaishankar said the Indian military's air capabilities, including fighter jets and missiles, caused significantly more damage to the Pakistani Air Force than Pakistan had inflicted on India. The Indian foreign minister also spoke of New Delhi's efforts to boost its domestic manufacturing of arms and ammunition. Referring to Indian-made weapons, he said, 'some of them have been tested in the recent conflict with Pakistan' and have been 'very successful.' Jaishankar went on to say that some Indian defense companies want to work more with Europe with regard to design, though he does not see this as 'just buying more weapons from Europe.' The foreign minister also touched upon the Ukraine conflict, stating that India has never sought a role in it. 'If we can be of any help … we are open, but we are not pushing ourselves,' he said. Jaishankar added that India has been acting as a conduit between the two sides, keeping lines of communication open and occasionally relaying messages.
Russia Today
16 hours ago
- Russia Today
India tests AI-based machine gun (VIDEO)
The Indian Army has successfully tested an AI-enabled light machine gun at an altitude of 14,000 feet, military officials said on Monday. The weapon was developed by Indian defense firm BSS Material Ltd., and is based on the AI-powered Negev, a gun originally developed by Israel Weapon Industries. During trials, the gun successfully showcased its capability to autonomously identify and engage targets in complex mountainous terrain, a crucial feature for effective operations in India's rugged and challenging border regions. The weapon's core strength stems from a sophisticated multi-sensor AI module, which enables advanced capabilities such as automatic target detection, friend-foe classification, and real-time engagement, allowing for precise and effective operation, an India Today report said. The system is ideal for applications such as base defense, convoy protection, and perimeter security, particularly in situations where threat levels are consistently high and where troop deployment is challenging or impractical, according to officials cited in the report. The system's primary armament consists of a 7.62 mm medium machine gun, which is mounted on a tripod for stability. The primary weapon can be easily swapped out to accommodate different operational requirements. Additionally, the system is equipped with sensors and technologies, including an optical camera, thermal imager, GPS, magnetometer, inclinometer, and laser rangefinder, according to Indian defense officials. India's defense manufacturing is emerging as a cornerstone of New Delhi's strategic and economic ambitions, and government policies are focusing on modern weaponry which is both designed and manufactured in India, industry experts noted. The Indian military has identified over 5,000 items that must be manufactured in the country rather than rely on imports. Dehradun-based #BSSMaterial has successfully conducted High Altitude Trials of it's AI-driven Autonomous Lethal Weapons System (Negev LMG) with the #IndianArmy at 14,000ft. Called the positive indigenization list (PIL), the initiative began in 2020 and aims to offer defense items to be indigenized by Indian manufacturers, including small and medium enterprises and startups. In recent years, New Delhi has introduced a range of initiatives and policies aimed at encouraging private sector companies to engage in defense manufacturing, in an effort to boost domestic production and reduce reliance on foreign suppliers. According to defense ministry data, India aspires to achieve $34 billion in defense production by 2029.
