Anurag Dwivedi Writes: Since withdrawal and concessions are no longer an option thanks to the IW campaigns on both side, the correct way forward may be that neither side withdraws and instead both China and Bhutan create a temporary post in Doklam held by a mutually decided administratively viable strength of one platoon each.
Of late, the slant in the articles carried by the Economist is palpable. A shoddy and shallow analysis, that still refers to Bhutan as a vassal of India and hints at the possibility of 1962……….
The profession of handling the international relations is carried out by the diplomats. They are uniquely skilful in dealing with people in the most prudent and tactful manner. The work which is carried out is of utmost importance to a nation’s interest as they pro-tanto decide the fate of one’s nation through important bilateral and multilateral exchanges amongst states…
The current stand-off in Bhutan should be seen in the larger perspective of China’s strategy in the region based on the rules of its ancient game of ‘Wei Qi’ or Go – an ‘encirclement game’…….India therefore needs to ensure it provides a mature and a calibrated response on multiple fronts, along with other like-minded middle powers in the region to thwart China’s game of ‘Wei Qi’ especially in the Asia Pacific region.
Ms Varya Srivastava Writes: Being a landlocked country, Nepal had always been dependent on India for supply of resources. However, the forced Nepalese transition into a democracy strained the relations between the two countries giving the window to China to nurture its ties with Nepal. Today, markets in Nepal are flooded with Chinese goods.