• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • South Asia Thankfully Left Out of U.S.-China Joint Statement

    Compared to the U.S.–China joint statement in 2009, this year’s joint statement issued at the summit between Presidents Barack Obama and Hu Jintao contains no mention of improving U.S.–China “communication, dialogue, and cooperation on issues related to South Asia.”

    India objected strenuously to the language in the 2009 joint statement, and the U.S. has apparently taken on board New Delhi’s concerns. In any case, China’s actions over the last two years have demonstrated that China’s interests in South Asia don’t significantly match up with the Obama Administration’s goals or U.S. interests in the region.

    Like Hu Jintao’s visit to the U.S., Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao traveled to India in December in the context of recent antagonistic interactions. China’s visa policy toward Indian citizens in Jammu and Kashmir has been the recent catalyst for tensions in the relationship. The Chinese government denied a visa last summer to Indian Lieutenant General B. S. Jaswal, whose command portfolio includes Jammu and Kashmir, before his visit to the high-level China–India defense exchange meetings. China has also been improving its military infrastructure near the border with the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh in combination with enhancements of transportation links to those areas. Additionally, reports of PLA troops in the Gilgit-Baltistan region of Pakistan augment the uncertainty of Chinese intentions in South Asia.

    Another issue that has raised concern in the U.S. is China’s insistence in moving forward with a deal to supply Pakistan with two new nuclear reactors. China claims that the two reactors fall under a 1991 nuclear reactor agreement deal. The 1991 deal was struck before Beijing joined the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), which prohibits member states from supplying nuclear technology and fuel to countries that have not signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The Obama Administration has argued the deal should be brought before the NSG for special approval; however, when asked about the deal at the last NSG meeting, Chinese officials refused to comment. Despite the nuclear proliferation concerns stemming from Pakistan’s past history with the A. Q. Khan network and lack of transparency on this new reactor deal, reports suggest that China is advancing its efforts to complete the exports of the reactors to Pakistan.

    The recent actions by China, along with clamoring from India about the 2009 statement, is probably the reason for U.S. officials eliminating the direct reference to South Asia in this week’s joint statement. The Obama Administration should rethink its views on opportunities for interaction with China in South Asia. At the moment, there appears to be more differences than commonalities in our two countries’ policies toward South Asia. Clearly, room for close dialogue and cooperation on South Asia between the U.S. and China is currently unrealistic.

    Posted in International [slideshow_deploy]

    4 Responses to South Asia Thankfully Left Out of U.S.-China Joint Statement

    1. Pingback: Tweets that mention South Asia Thankfully Left Out of U.S.-China Joint Statement | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News. -- Topsy.com

    2. Gabriel says:


      Did you know that conservatives have a legislative history of shipping more jobs overseas then Democrats? Would you like the legislative evidence?

    3. O_Henry says:

      I thought in a free country free companies were free to leave and go where ever they pleased. I would consider it the job of conservators of freedom to secure ALL freedoms (including those of a free factor owner to relocate), and that it was the work of government to not only recognize these natural freedoms but to enshrine them in law.

      Could some companies be seeking greater freedoms from intrusive government and actually leave to find them?

    4. Gary Zaetz, Cary, No says:

      The Chinese Government itself has confirmed what has long been suspected – that the Obama Administration is bending over backward not to offend the Chinese. In an August 19, 2010 feature run on China's CCTV-4, Chinese journalist Meng Xiangqing referred explicitly to "the Obama administration's policy of avoiding overly… upsetting China". The Obama Administration's kowtowing to China even extends to stopping our ongoing searches for the remains of hundreds of US World War II MIAs lost in India's Arunachal Pradesh region, which China claims as its own, despite the fact that the British and then the Indians have controlled that area for decades. This is a clear violation of international humanitarian law's protections of war dead… It has been pointed out elsewhere that the Obama Administration's victorious "kowtow" faction, which has hurt the families of so many American MIAs by influencing the President to submit to Chinese pressure to cancel MIA recovery operations in Arunachal Pradesh, India, is led by Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg, and includes National Security Council Asia director Jeffrey Bader and his deputy Evan Medeiros. http://www.projecthomecoming.org/

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.