India must stick to the important parts of its relations with China
With reference to Brahma Chellaney’s article Chinese checkmate (May 15), the India-China border dispute needs to be seen in a wider perspective. Of its 23 territorial disputes active since 1949, China offered substantial compromises in 17. In fact, the regime insecurity prevalent in totalitarian states could explain China’s pattern of cooperation or delay in its territorial disputes. Our greater concern should be the Chinese pseudo-suzerainty over river waters flowing into India. New Delhi’s insistence on installing monitors at their new dams could have triggered the recent incursion. India should keep pegging away at the important aspects of our bilateral equations rather than over-reacting to transient symptoms.
Janaki Narayanan, via email
This is not in the public interest
This refers to the editorial At the cost of others (May 16). Notwithstanding the goodness of their causes, it is appalling that many protests have recently ended up turning violent with protestors damaging public property. Besides, by forcing people to stay away from the streets, violent protests adversely affect one’s access to livelihood, medical facilities and education. It is time that those who destroy public property are made to pay for the damage caused.
Kiran Sabharwal, via email
Not just the power of one
This refers to Amish’s article The centre doesn’t hold (Modern Indian, May 14). The basic premise that decentralisation and greater autonomy to states propels greater economic well-being in comparison to over-centralisation is worth consideration. Not only will decentralisation curb the Centre’s concentration of power, it will also strengthen the local government and enable it to participate in the development process.
Devraj, via email
We at Hindustan Times would like to know more about what you want from your page. So write to us at Hindustan Times House, 18-20, KG Marg, New Delhi 110001 Phone: +91-11-66561234, email@example.com