The Australian carried some interesting articles this weekend about the concerns being raised by other countries in the region over Kevin Rudd's China focus. Are they scaremongering or hould we be concerned by this?
A neighbour with whom I often have lively discussions pointed out that one important country, India, is a democracy (albeit one with some problems). It is a member of the Commonwealth. It has a vibrant economy, a rapidly growing middle class and English is widely spoken. India has close trade ties with many other countries in the region of the Indian-subcontinent and Asia.
Despite that Kevin Rudd seems determined to ignore India - as noted by his unilateral cancellation of important talks between Australia, India, Japan and the US. There has been a suggestion that pressure is being applied by his Chinese mates.
If there was an economic slow down in China (or, worse still, a collapse) then it would dramatically affect the Australian economy. Why then is Kevin Rudd insisting on an 'all eggs in one basket' approach?
Should we be able to do business with India (and associated countries)or do we have to accept that the price of doing business with China is having to drastically cut back our relationships with other important regional and economic powers?

Communicat,

What an interesting question. I have to admit that, living in China, I had become a tad myopic lately regarding Australia's ties with India.

Out of interest on that subject: when I first came here and would ask who the Prime Minister of Australia was no-one would have any idea. Now, however, it is a question that everyone knows the answer to, and many students who, last year, had considered going to America to study are now changing their minds and heading for Australian universities and schools instead. In fact, among the student population, America is losing all its glamour.

But you are quite right: India even shares common threads to Australia as both countries were at one stage under British rule. The links, as you pointed out are copious and long-standing.

I can see I have been remiss in not keeping abreast of Australian/Indian relations and am interested in remedying that. And also in learning what other people think?

That's a very good question. i'm beginning to see many more flaws in Rudd than the positive points, which are few.

But it must be asked on what status the trade with India which has not signed the NPT. Howard, who like to think he was big on security and international law, signed a deal to sell Australian uranium to India despite the NPT fact. Personally, with Israeli secret development of nuclear technology and it's extremely boistrous threats to use them, and the US' presidential candidates to leave nuclear weapons "on the table" and Hillary Clinton's chilling threats to Olbiterate Iran, I think it's out of the bag and we should sell it to any who will pay good prices, but that's just me.

The thing with China is that it has the "big" army and the aggression (rebellious government).
After decades of pathetic defence preparations Mr. Rudd may feel we have to appease these people.
And...theres always the mystery of whether the managers/founders/grand papas of Labor really ever let go of communism thing and perhaps just might like to reconnect with it again.

The Chinese have always been extremely defence oriented. If you want aggresive, look at the west.