33 PM Debate: Geopolitics - 2

After USA and USSR, a Chinese reporter was given the chance to ask questions.

"Mr Satyankar, Mr Nehru. First of all, I would like to thank India on behalf of my country for the medical aid in the war of independence against Japanese colonialism."

"We welcome you behalf of my country. Well, we are neighbours, both suffering from colonialism. It is the natural thing to do."

Satyankar and Nehru both acknowledged the thanks with smiles.

"I have the some questions from Mr Satyankar first. Tibet has joined Asian Union. But, isn't it a part of China? How can a province enter an organisation made for countries?

Another question, why was Japan a founding member, despite it committing horrifying war crimes, especially against China and Korea?

The Nanjing massacre happened directly under the Japanese prince, and tens of thousands were raped and killed. Entire villages were massacred by burning people alive. As a victim of such barbarity under British, French, Portugese, and Dutch, why did you suggest Japan as a founding member?

And the next question is for both.

The British invaded and colonialised some parts of China, which is now inherited by India. Does India plan to return Chinese lands? If so, how will the negotiations take place?"

Satyankar was prepared for such questions, so he started answering without hesitation.

"Currently, India doesn't recognise the borders of China. Whether Tibet is a part of China or not, it can only be decided after I meet with China's president. As you would know, India abstained when Tibet petitioned to join the Union.

Whatever happens between China and Tibet is their internal problem. They can solve it themselves. If both parties would like, India can play the part of mediator as well. Otherwise, India wouldn't interfere.

Now onto Japan, first of all, India does condemn Imperial Japan's atrocities all across Asia. Personally, I would suggest Japan to atleast officially apologise for the crimes it committed. They should set an example for the other colonial countries to recognise their mistakes, apologise, return any treasures they looted, and try to reconcile and earn the forgiveness of the people that suffered due to them.

For the reasoning behind the permanent seat, it is because it is a major power in Asia, even historically. And even more importantly, because Japan helped India during its war of Independence. It helped our hero, Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose who sacrificed himself for the country.

We have to understand, that geopolitics is a very complex subject. For us, UK is a demonic country. For most of the countries in the world, it is. But for Europe, it is something that helped them against Nazi Germany, though USSR did the most part.

India wouldn't really have anything against UK holding a seat in the UN as long as it has learned its lesson and didn't try to attack any country for its benefit again. Sadly, UK isn't like that, and I doubt it will change its way of invading and stealing from other countries.

Both UK and Japan are island countries, who have committed war crimes that any amount of money and apology won't suffice. I have talked to PMs of both countries. Despite their similarity, I can vouch that under the leadership of the current Japanese PM, it has changed its ways and wouldn't commit horrible war crimes.

Japan needs to repent, and helping the countries it destroyed will be the perfect way to do so.

Personally, I believe that the next generations of enemy countries shouldn't bear resentment, if, and only if, the generation which wronged the other country repents, and make sures that it never happens again.

Personally, I openly say, that I will hate Britain throughout my life. It will never change until I die. But, I don't want the generations after me suffer in the hatred. Well, this will be doable only when Britain repents. You can see the reparations demands that we made. Perhaps, the countries that suffered under Japan can do something similar too?

But, we can't clap with one hand, can we? The other side needs to show sincerity. Permanent members need to mediate peace in Asia. And Japan can help the countries getting freedom one by one this way.

I am confident enough that it wouldn't invade under new leadership and wouldn't have imperialistic ambitions atleast.

Now for the last question, I would prefer to talk to Chinese President Mao ji about it personally. This is something that we need to sit down and talk. I can't answer you regarding that right now. But I can atleast attest that the overlapping territories that our maps show aren't because it may have been under a Chinese Empire. The Laddakh region that China claims is a strategic position to access Xinjiang which is rich in resources and connects to central Asia.

From my desire, I would like to have a peaceful border with China, like USA and Canada does. We will surely sit down after elections, and solve our disputes. After the elections, my first priority in international relations is solving all the border disputes."

Nehru answered the same about the border disputes. Saying Hindi-Chini bhai bhai.

Next, it was a Korean journalist.

"The tensions between Korea controlled by USA and USSR has been on the rise lately. Both have applied for membership in Asian Union, but it was put on hold because both of the governments claim to be the official Korea.

Which side does India recognise? If a war breaks out between the two parts, which side will India choose?

And most importantly, does India have any plans on the reunification of Korea without bloodshed?"

Satyankar thought about that it wouldn't take too much time before the Korean War breaks out. He didn't know the exact date, and he didn't know how much butterfly effect will happen because of him. For all he knows, the war can start any second now.

Well, he will like to prevent it from happening, and reunite Korea, to both save innocent lives and show the world India's diplomatic power to be established as a mediator. Being a neutral mediator in the world is the safest position, and most profitable for business.

If the people were rational, he could have convinced them that war wouldn't achieve anything, but push them more decades back. But, it is the era of cold war, where USSR and USA have lost their minds, and play their wars in other countries.

It's very hard to win an argument against stupid people afterall.

"First of all, I would like to state that India definitely wants to prevent any further bloodshed from happening. Korea is like a family to us.

I don't know the exact details, but there was an Empress of Korea, Empress Boju around first century AD. She was a princess from Ayuta, which is most likely named Kanyakumari right now, It could be another city, but like I said, I don't know the very exact details, we will have to work together to unearth them. Atleast 10 present people have her lineage. You would be surprised to know how many similarities Korean and Tamil has.

First of all, I would urge both sides of the government to not make the mistake of attacking each other. Socialism and Capitalism have their pros and cons. It isn't something big enough that should cause Civil War. A Civil War can take decades to end, which can cause the country to suffer for centuries.

India doesn't recognise either sides of the government as the official government of Korea. Just in case a war starts, India won't support any sides.

The best way to resolve the issue will be, according to me, to follow some steps.

First of all, decide on how to conduct elections. After deciding and negotiating, dissolve the two parties and let people form new, multiple parties, but not based on Capitalism and Socialism. Any party following extreme, inflexible ideologies will inevitably cause instability.

Then, conduct elections to let the people decide. Whatever results come, accept it, and try to win the next elections on the basis of how much the ruling party developed or did not develop the country.

My advice would be to let us finish our elections, and then, a neutral country between socialism and capitalism, like India or Indonesia or both, can mediate between the two parties to set up election rules IF both parties aren't able to come to an agreement.

Korea's problem isn't as severe as we had with British extremist puppets who wanted Pakistan on the basis of religion. All Korean people follow the same religion, speak the same language, and have been united kingdoms for the major part of history.

Once a war starts, even if it ends in a day, the aftermath may destroy any chance of people of the same country getting along in the future.

Remain calm, rational, think about what's best for your own people rather than listening to foreign powers, and choose development over pointless war."

Nehru's response on it was more or less same too. He also advised to solve the matter through peaceful means.