The second tier of criteria suggested by Timothy Beardson is ‘prosperity’ which refers to economic growth, employment, security of economic development. In the early months of 1948, Jawaharlal Nehru told his chief ministers to pay attention to economic liberation as he does not envisage democracy divorced from welfare. Poverty was inherent in independent India and he thought that a planned economy is the right approach to alleviate it.

“Grow more-food” was his catch-word. But words are words until they are not acted upon for which a vibrant economic strategy is desired. Six decades have passed and yet it is only recently that annual growth rate has touched 7%. This is clearly insufficient compared to Chinese growth rate of 10% maintained for the last 30 years which only last year has dropped to 6.5 per cent. Moreover, as per 2013 statistics, GDP of India was $1.87 trillion, annual growth rate was 5% and GDP per capita income was $1458.87 while GDP of China was $10 trillion, annual growth rate 7.7%and per capita income $6807.43.

The face of India is shown through the national network or the film industry is not the real one.

Contrary to the poverty-stricken Indian, a Chinese belonging to lower stratum of society enjoys more economic welfare, because the system provides him opportunities and jobs within the country. Only those who are educated, skilled and well-trained to work on projects such as construction of roads, pipelines, digging canals, handling energy generating projects and so on and who are associated with big Chinese companies are selected to leave for foreign lands on good remuneration and fringe benefits. This is an obvious proof where hunger hangs over and where prosperity rules.

However, phenomenon of change in the US as defined by Alvin Toffler is “future shock” which has brought negative impact on society. Conversely, pace of change in China is a different matter as it has appeared with positive results. The life of a Chinese is neither hectic because of over-speeding of change nor his feelings have turned mechanized as it has happened mostly in the industrialized West.

Certainly environmental problems are there but Chinese government is working on it and it is close to controlling it.

India is in deep water owing to debt. The bulk of debt is a yardstick to measure where a country stands on poverty cum prosperity scale.

India’s external debt is much higher at $485 billion in comparison to its GDP of $1.87 trillion whereas China’s total external debt is only $874 billion for a $10 trillion economy. In this regard, two factors are noteworthy: not only Indian economic statistical figures about recent growth are less than those of Chinese if compared with per capita income, GDP and annual growth rate of two countries, but the figures provided by Indians forexports are hugely exaggerated.

The detractors maintain that in the field of science and technology, China is a sterile land where no innovation can emerge. This is again a misconception. Tsinghua University recognized as MIT of China, located in Beijing and modelled after Thomas Jefferson University and Soviet Union’s Higher education centres, is undergoing a process of adaptation with the aim of improving academic standards, promotion and expansion of research. Around 2004, the project 985 in which 39 important universities participated, project 211 and the high level Innovation Talents Project were launched and remarkable improvement was recorded in the disciplines of higher education. The total number of research papers this year at this Chinese university are greater in number than MIT’s!

China has also secured Combat Drone technology. It is a nuclear missile power, not to forget its capability in conventional war. The borders in Tibet are well-protected. Chinese have properly been responding to provocative actions by the US and her allies in South China Sea. In this age of nuclear diplomacy, China is a strong combination of global strategy, military and economic strength. At the same time, China today can give economic joltsby devaluing its currency or pushing its gold in the market. In certain situation, jolting capacity is more lethal than one strong stroke.

Under the circumstance, China’s grand strategy is to maintain domestic order and welfare of the people, strong defence against threats and building its sphere of influence in the world.

India has faltered behind because of its insecurity, instability, hatred for its ruthless management of internal affairs and hegemonic designs towards neighbours, terrorist activities and unsound economic strength. It is certainly not easy to dispel the air of mistrust which hangs over Indian global relations.

The third tier of Timothy Beardson’s criteria is ‘identity’ by which he means what kind of society China or India is: democratic or otherwise, what the salient values are, the agenda of the ruling party and military aims and objectives for the future, and what the elements of culture are, what is the gender of the ruling party stands for and the ruling contract with the public.

The gist of Beardson’s argument is that Chinese do not belong to the main stream of universal human kind, which means that Chinese are not only culturally and historically but biologically different people. But Beardson does not tell either how to explain Korean, Japanese and Philippines who essentially belong to the yellow race as differing from Chinese or how they are similar to the people of the rest of humanity.

Ever since 1947, Indian economy, divided into private and public sections, was mainly a regulated economy. The government looked after education, health and the services like transport through railway, and entertainment through TV.

The improvement in Indian economic condition happened as increase in Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), domestic consumption and reliance on information technology yielded encouraging results. The role of information technology was the main changing factor.

Timothy Beardson’s fourth criterion is ‘honour’ “which China and India maintain in terms of influence and status. China is proud of its relations with the ‘String of Pearls’. It is not merely a good friend of Pakistan, but it has cordial relations with many countries in the region e.g., North Korea, Sri-Lanka, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, and outside the vicinity as far as Africa, Europe and America. China treats Sri Lanka as a partner and has financially supported for developing airports and seaports. Sri Lanka’s response is so encouraging for China that many of its submarines are stationed there.

Economically developed Eastern side has placed China at second position in the category of largest economy after the US. One can imagine what place would be reserved if western side of China, a neglected area, begins yielding benefits as a result of construction of Pak–China Economic Corridor. The range of multifarious benefits from the corridor will encompass Russian Asian States, Iran, the Middle East, Africa and India (if it likes). Further increase in export will help China in transforming challenges into opportunities for matchless success.

From this angle, the two options before the US are: firstly, a strong military presence down China and in the Pacific. On the contrary, alliance between two strong powers of China and Russian Federation and in addition to neighbouring states will defeat the policy of containment. And if China develops its relations with South American countries, it will provide an edge over the US.

The second option on which the US appears to be working is to prepare India under its shadows so that it could erect challenges and hurdles for China to surmount. This line of action seems relevant as mutual mistrust, suspicion and rivalry already exist between India and China. But propaganda based on the theories such as “Chinese society will brittle at home and burlesque overseas” or India is overtaking China in economic growth are not convincing.

Even today, the pivot of Indian economy is agriculture; technology can give boost; industrialization is proving profitable; labour being cheap in India, the cost of finished manufactured goods is low and this is also a factor which will strengthen economy, provided India has the wisdom to avoid arms race and war.