So, because India has not signed the treaty do you think we should not do any business with them in any field at all?
Isn't this sort of approach a bit short sighted? Is it really the proper approach?

I wrote ONLY to block the Uranium to India. I do not know and I do not think that our exports decreased in last year to India. Generally I agree that India is a big country and we must improve our relations with this country, without of cause to violate the international law.
Antoniops Symeonakis
Adelaide

We will not improve relations with India when Rudd takes unilateral action to dismantle important talks. It won't improve relations with Japan or the US either. Of course it might 'improve' relations with China, if they need improving.
Trade with India tends to be fairly static. It does not grow at the rate that it could. Indeed, trade with a great part of the world tends to be fairly static because of our narrow focus on 'the Asian region'. Other countries, quite small countries, manage to do more diverse business than we do.
Not sure what we can do about it but the lost opportunities are surely frustrating for many. (It's all very well saying 'just go out and do it yourself' but the reality is that, in some regions there is a need for government to government contact as well.)

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

The Chinese for much of their history were occupited by the Mongols or Manchus. Abbeit , she was strong during the Chou and Han dynasties in her own right. More recently [1953], when Stalin died, China did suppress counter-cultures in its non-Han territories [their are 57 ethnicities in China], the Han count for over well over 90%, but over the centuries tended administer China not rule the country.

As states above, when Stalin died, China did try to exercise greater influence but it was srudied and limited; it feared Russia and the US. For example, huffed and puffed, but it didn't invade Taiwan.

With regards India, China and Russia, any unity, if it occurs, would more likely betweem oliarchs' networks. Unlike with Mao's Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution, China will likely create surpluses
and rather than try innovate, which the West [especially the US] is good]; China will then "buy" Western companies to hasten technology transfer. The Middle-Kingdom's poelples are highly deferrential and this unlikely to change in a generation. Likewise, China would expect deference to from India and Russia, but it would not necessarily try dominate these countries. It's militarism would unlike Japan's attempt at Co-Prosperity Sphere. In the twenty-first century, networks/quanxi between Chinese hang, Indian Brahmins and Russian Mafia would not be a military war, but rather an economic war involving transnationalism under globalisation against the West.

"We have to recognise, despite political protestations to the contrary, that we are not "part of the Asian region" and we never will be. We are adjacent to it. We need to be good neighbours but we have to acknowledge that we are not going to be invited to live in the houses of our neighbours." - Communicat

You are familiar with Huntington? I have a feeling you are correct, to some extent, that Asian values and Western values are sometimes incompatible. Malaysia overt in its critism; Singapore less now, but it is below the surface. And, perhaps, Dr Mahathir Mohamed is correct in referring to Australia as a "transplant" from Europe. But that doesn't mean we can't trade. Yet, I think there is a problem with ethics.

I would like to see integration with Asia, but we have to be careful. We must maintain our own identity. I don't mean ethnically but the Westminister system and modes of Law. Albeit, we lack Bill of Rights to make Governments and Courts accountable to Rights of the People.

While it true that Max Weber said that Capitalism cannot be sustained without some tolerance of corruption [Redding, 1990], it is also true that guanxi [connections] is utilitarian [good, while it is useful for the family/company]. Asian companies -with power- -with different national sovereignties- -with no true democracies- ; will be able to levelage covert deals and exploit workforces in ways that are illegal in the West.

The question is will the rich and powerful want to pressure government for to drop our current ideals to compete under globalisation?