While doing so, it also referred to the 1962 war that was fought between the two countries more than five decades ago wherein China captured a substantial chunk of territory in three sectors. India received support from the erstwhile Soviet Union as well as the US against China at that time.

“The situation in 1962 was different and India of 2017 is different. Bhutan government had issued a statement yesterday in which it made it clear that the land in question belonged to Bhutan. It is located near India's land. There is an arrangement between India and Bhutan for giving security,” PTI quoted Jaitley as saying.

Indian media reports maintain that China’s attempts to build a road in the strategically key Donglang area started the latest round of skirmishes. The area is strategically located at the Sikkim-Bhutan-Tibet tri-junction and could give China a major military advantage over India.

The Indian Army had reportedly blocked the construction of a road by China in Donglang, a disputed territory between China and Bhutan.

India’s Ministry of External Affairs said in a press release on Friday that it was “deeply concerned at the recent Chinese actions and has conveyed to the Chinese government that such construction would represent a significant change of status quo with serious security implications for India”.</s>ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — The words from Pakistan’s top foreign policy adviser could not have been clearer. At a news conference welcoming China’s foreign minister to the Pakistani capital this week, Sartaj Aziz declared, “Pakistan’s relations with China are the cornerstone of our foreign policy.

It was a blunt signal of change by a country that has long been a key ally and aid recipient of the United States, from their Cold War alliance against Soviet meddling in Afghanistan to a more recent, uneasy partnership in the fight against Islamist terrorism in the region. Today, Pakistan continues to receive hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. annual support.

But Islamabad’s political pivot from Washington to Beijing, already its dominant investor and increasingly important global interlocutor, is hardly surprising, experts said.

Pakistani officials have been worried for months that the Trump administration will put heavy pressure on their government, possibly by cutting aid or even declaring it a “state sponsor of terrorism” — a giant black mark — because of complaints by Afghan officials, U.S. military officials and members of Congress that Pakistan continues to harbor anti-Afghan insurgents.

At the same time, Islamabad has been concerned about Washington’s emerging friendship with India, Pakistan’s much larger, nuclear-armed rival and neighbor. This week’s upbeat state visit to Washington by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who was received enthusiastically by President Trump, raised new alarm bells here.

On Thursday, Pakistani newspapers featured a photo of Trump and Modi hugging goodbye, along with anxious headlines and a testy statement from Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry that called a joint statement by the two leaders “singularly unhelpful” in achieving stability and peace in South Asia and said it “aggravates an already tense situation.” The ministry also said that China had endorsed Pakistan’s view.

Pakistan was especially upset that Modi and Trump spoke about the importance of reining in regional terrorism — referring indirectly to Pakistan’s alleged support for anti-Afghan insurgents — but ignored Pakistan’s denunciations of human rights abuses by Indian forces against protesters in the contested border region of Kashmir, as well as its charges of Indian support for anti-Pakistan militants.

“Those who seek to appropriate a leadership role in the fight against terror are themselves responsible for much of the terror unleashed in Pakistan,” the Foreign Ministry said, referring to India. Pakistani commentators suggested that Washington, in turn, was trying to please India by suddenly placing Syed Salahuddin, the longtime Pakistan-based leader of a Kashmiri Muslim rebel group, on a list of global terrorists. Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar said the United States had begun “speaking India’s language.”

Pakistani officials and commentators also expressed concern about new agreements between India and the United States on sales of Predator drones and other American defense equipment as well as commercial aircraft. Pakistan has had a long-standing military and intelligence relationship with the United States, and it has fought three limited wars with India since the 1960s.

But the more immediate concern for Pakistan is Afghanistan. In recent months, as the Trump administration debates policy options in the region, Pakistani officials have attempted to shake Afghan accusations of promoting cross-border insurgents and have been quick to send sympathetic messages for Afghan terrorism victims, but so far their gestures have been rebuffed.

At this point, officials in Washington appear likely to send more U.S. troops to Afghanistan but have given few hints about how they will approach Pakistan, amid a chorus of calls for them to punish or isolate it. India, in sharp contrast, is a close ally and benefactor of Afghanistan, which is appreciated in Washington but seen by Pakistanis of all political stripes as a direct threat to Pakistan’s influence.

“Trump has no business giving India an interventionist role in Afghanistan when, unlike India, it is Pak that shares a border with Afghanistan,” Imran Kahn, the leading political opponent of Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, tweeted Thursday. The joint statement by Trump and Modi, he said in a follow-up tweet, “has removed the fig leaf of morality and justice in U.S. foreign policy.”

Frustrated that the world fails to see its point of view and that Washington may be pulling away from a relationship that Pakistan considered permanent if strained, Pakistan has now enlisted China’s help as a mediator with Afghanistan, the main issue that brought Foreign Minister Wang Yi to Islamabad this week, after first stopping in Kabul.

In the news conference here, Wang said Pakistan was playing a “vital role” to bring peace and stability to the region, and a spokesman for his office declared that Pakistan has been “at the front line of the counterterrorism fight.” Aziz, in turn, described Pakistan’s relationship with China as “strategic,” multidimensional and “all-weather.”

Some Pakistani commentators have warned that Pakistan is becoming too economically dependent on China and has pinned too many hopes on a relationship that may be driven largely by Beijing’s search for profitable investment returns and for platforms to display its global influence.

But so far, China’s foray into the mistrustful thicket of Afghan-Pakistani relations appears to have been low-key and helpful. It previously helped advance proposals by Pakistan to arrange peace talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban, though they eventually foundered, and it is now undertaking some shuttle diplomacy between the two capitals.

Wang’s recent visits to Kabul and Islamabad led to three-way statements calling for greater cooperation on a variety of topics, a crisis mechanism to avert confrontations, a three-way dialogue among the countries’ foreign ministers, and a revival of the Quadrilateral Coordination Group that originally tried to arrange the Taliban peace talks.

Given the terse and angry tone of recent exchanges between Afghan and Pakistani officials, such small steps and bland language sound almost like a diplomatic coup</s>Though not a part of Indian territory, the plateau holds immense strategic importance for Delhi and is vital to its geopolitical interests.

"The area in contention is extremely close to a very vulnerable stretch of Indian territory that effectively connects the bulk of India to its northeastern states," Shashank Joshi, senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) in London told CNN.

"Additional construction could skew the local balance of power in China's favor, essentially leaving India more vulnerable to invasion in case of a military confrontation with Beijing."</s>At Doklam, an area near Sikkim, soldiers from India and China have been locked in a standoff for nearly a month now. While India has deployed more troops in a "non-combative mode" in the region to strengthen its position, experts are concerned about the deteriorating ties between the two nations, which are still overcoming bitter memories of the 1962 Sino-Indian War.

At a time when China dismisses India's assertion in the region along Bhutan border as "untenable," and wants it to recall the 1962 war and withdraw troops from the area, India has maintained a bold posture.

"India of 2017 is different from India of 1962. Those were different situations," Union Defence Minister Arun Jaitley said last week.

But, how much has India changed over the last few decades to challenge China in the event of a future conflict?

During the Republic Day parade on January 26, much of India's military might was focused on China, which is a headache for India's planners, because of its huge defence budget and military modernisation plans. Although sheer numbers or technological advantage alone cannot win wars, defence postures of both nations are one of the major factors that can shape a future India-China war.

According to military analytics website Global Firepower, China has the third most powerful military in the world after the US and Russia. China, which spends $161 billion annually for defence-related purposes, is followed by India with an annual defence spending of $51 billion.

Let's have a look at how the militaries of both countries stack up against each other:

India has 1,325,000 active military personnel, or the "ready-to-fight" soldiers, compared to 2,335,000 active frontline fighters for China. In addition, China also has 619 million people who are fit to join the army. India, on the other hand, has nearly 490 million people who are fit for military services.

Meanwhile, 4,635,000 military personnel are currently serving in the Chinese military, compared to 3,468,000 in Indian military.

The Indian military has 2,102 aircraft, including 676 fighter jets, 809 attack aircraft, 666 helicopters and 16 attack helicopters. China, on the other hand, has nearly 3,000 aircraft, which include 1,271 fighter jets, 1,385 attack aircraft, 912 helicopters and 206 attack helicopters.

Despite technological advancements in the modern battlefield, the combat tank still remains one of the primary spearheads for ground offensives. Indian military currently uses 4,426 tanks while Chinese military has 6,457 tanks.

The People's Liberation Army (PLA) also recently conducted trials of a new light battle tank (LBT) in Tibet. A Chinese government official, however, said that the trials were aimed at testing the tank's performance and not targeted at any country.

India, however, has 6,704 armoured fighting vehicles, almost 2,000 more than China's 4,788 vehicles. In terms of Rocket Projectiles, China has the upper hand with 1,770 systems, compared to only 292 used by the Indian military.

Naval strength is one of the most important defining military factors as it can play a significant role in responding to territorial disputes as well as enforcing maritime borders. Indian military is equipped with 295 such assets, including 3 aircraft carriers, 15 submarines and 11 destroyers.

While China has only one aircraft carrier, it lags India far behind with 68 submarines and 35 warships. Last week, the country also launched what it claimed to be the most advanced and largest warship in Asia.

The new warship was the first of Type 055 guided-missile destroyers that had been designed to join China's future aircraft carrier battle groups. With a displacement of more than 12,000 tonnes, the new warship surpasses South Korea's DDG-991 and Japan's ­Atago class, both having a 10,000-tonne displacement.

Roadways are crucial for mobilising the army, allowing the troops to access vital areas of a country. China has total roadway coverage of 3.8 million kilometres while India has a similar coverage of 3.3 million kilometres.

China has immensely reinforced its military capabilities since the 1962 war. Chinese President Xi Jinping had also recently undertaken in-depth military reforms by readjusting and optimising the country's military structure.

While China dreams to become the most powerful nation in the world, beyond ensuring economic prosperity, India has also focused more on boosting its military strength by adding air, missile and surveillance assets to its arsenal over the last few years.

But to make its operational concepts sufficiently tailored to take on the evolving Chinese challenge, it is high time India undertakes some effective military reforms.

"While Indian planners have moved toward adopting a more offensive form of area denial, they continue to rely, for the most part, on conventional forces that could be overcome or circumvented in the event of a fast-moving, localized, and limited border confrontation launched from higher elevations," Iskander Rehman for the Naval War College Review wrote in a paper, titled "A Himalayan Challenge: India's Conventional Deterrent and the Role of Special Operations Forces along the Sino-Indian Border."</s>UNITED NATIONS — India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi returned to the USA not quite knowing what to expect from planned summit meetings with President Donald Trump.

After all while both leaders are known as brash and outspoken figures, the visitor from New Delhi was particularly nervous over trade deficits and immigration. Yet personal chemistry between the leaders of the world’s two largest democracies smoothed over earlier concerns.

The Indian/USA relationship has evolved immensely from the days when nonaligned but often Soviet-tilting India was one of those countries with which Washington managed its ties, rather than warmly embraced its relations. But following the collapse of the former Soviet Union, India had lost its chief geopolitical patron and feared isolation, especially facing neighboring China.

Starting in the Clinton Administration and especially into the Bush years, the United States and India revived social and economic ties. Following the terrorist attacks on America in 2001, the U.S. redoubled its defense cooperation with India, a country who knew all too well the enduring dangers of militant Islamist terrorism confronting its secular state.

In a Joint Communique, the leaders “stressed that terrorism is a global scourge that must be fought and terrorist safe havens rooted out in every part of the world.”

The USA and India reaffirmed their intelligence sharing, defense cooperation and counter -terrorism ties. Both states warned that Pakistan should not harbor terrorists which have been active in destabilizing Afghanistan as well as Kashmir.

Prime Minister Modi warmly intoned, “We consider the USA as our primary partner for India’s social and economic transformation in all our flagship programs and schemes.”

Economically too India’s democratic state socialism, copied from Britain, served as a deadweight to the entrepreneurial skills and business acumen of the Indian merchant classes. The old Nehruian “Hindu rate of growth” pegged at a static 2.2 percent has been discarded by successive Indians governments since the 1990’s who have looked to free markets and economic growth as the elixir of long overdue socio/economic change. Finally, a growing Middle class is beginning to offset the undertow of poverty.

Mr. Modi’s government has served as a proud booster of India as a global business partner. His trademark economic reforms are long overdue yet are still stymied by the maze of government red tape and bureaucracy.

Business and trade between the two giant economies has boomed in the past decade. Back in 2006, two-way trade stood at $31 billion with a $12 billion deficit. Last year commerce reached $67 billion.

But growing foreign trade deficits have become a lightning rod for the American Administration; India’s $24 billion surplus with the USA is shadowed by China’s $347 billion in the same period.

Significantly, India is projected to become the world’s third-largest commercial aviation market by 2020. American aircraft sales to the South Asian giant are booming. In 2017, the Indian airline SpiceJet announced the order of 100 new Boeing 737’s, bringing its order to 205 planes valued at more than $20 billion and creating 130,000 American jobs in Washington state.

Defense cooperation is growing too as the U.S. is helping India’s military modernization program, especially for the Air Force. It’s no secret that the U.S. views India as a democratic counterweight to China’s strategic expansion.

The U.S. has worked with India to bring peace to conflict-ridden Afghanistan. Modi stated, “The increasing instability, due to terrorism, in Afghanistan is one of our common concerns. Both India and America have played an important role in rebuilding Afghanistan and ensuring its security.”

As a key member of the United Nations, India’s diplomacy holds genuine political clout among developing countries.

On the issue of immigration, what’s generally not known is that four million Indian-Americans live in the USA and over 700,000 U.S. citizens reside in India. For example, the U.S. Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley is the daughter of Indian parents.

Writing in the Hindu newspaper, former Indian Ambassador Nirupama Rao noted, “In a well calibrated program, Prime Minister Modi’s U.S. visit reaffirmed an indispensable partnership.”

“The visible personal chemistry” was praised by Indian Foreign affairs officials. “This was one of the most productive of all prime ministerial visits to the United States,” added Foreign Secretary S. Jaishanlar, himself a former Ambassador to Washington.

A close relationship between India and the USA enhances global security and equally brings growing economic benefits to both partners. It’s a Win-Win for both Washington and New Delhi.

John J. Metzler is a United Nations correspondent covering diplomatic and defense issues. He is the author of Divided Dynamism the Diplomacy of Separated Nations: Germany, Korea, China (2014). [See pre-2011 Archives]



Login To Your FaceBook to Make Comments</s>NEW DELHI: The India-China military stand-off seems set for a long haul with China responding to defence minister Arun Jaitley 's remark that India is not what it was in 1962 by saying neither was China and the developments coinciding with unusual activity of Chinese warships in the Indian Ocean Jaitley's comment was a reaction to China's blunt reminder that India should not forget the "historical lessons" of the 1962 war which ended badly for India. On Monday, the rhetoric grew more heated with the Chinese spokesperson noting China too is different and will take "all necessary measures" to safeguard its territorial sovereignty, a PTI report from Beijing said.The sharp exchange comes as Indian and Chinese soldiers have dug into positions and pitched tents in anticipation of a prolonged confrontation near the Sikkim-Bhutan-India trijunction, even as the Navy is closely monitoring "an unusual surge" in the number of Chinese warships in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR).Far away from this virtually eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation on the land border, which many believe will eventually ease with "some sort of mutual troop pull-back from the forward positions", India and China are also currently engaged in shadow-boxing on the high seas in the IOR."Indian naval satellite Rukmini (Gsat-7), long-range maritime patrol aircraft like Poseidon-8I and warships have monitored at least 13 Chinese naval units in the IOR over the last two months. They range from the latest Luyang-III class guided-missile destroyers to the more benign hydrographic research vessels," said a source.In Beijing, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Geng Shuang said the Sino-India border in the Sikkim sector is well demarcated and said India had "trepassed" into Chinese territory. But while claiming the construction of a road — the bone of contention — was legitimate activity, China has chosen to ignore Bhutan's protest that its land has been encroached upon.With the two armies unwilling to budge from their positions on the Doklam plateau, which is actually Bhutanese territory but being claimed by China to construct a motorable road towards the Doka La area held by Indian troops, sources say diplomatic hotlines are now working overtime to resolve the almost month-long troop confrontation in the remote border region. "It will have to resolved diplomatically. The two armies are playing the waiting game to see if the other side blinks first. As demanded by India and Bhutan, China should restore the status quo that it unilaterally disrupted by entering the Doklam area to construct the road," said a source.As was first reported by TOI last week, both the armies have reinforced their positions in the region by pumping in more troops and setting up logistic chains for food and other supplies. The "pro-active stance" adopted by Indian troops on the ground, in defence of Bhutanese territory because it has "serious security implications" for India as well, has led Beijing to sharpen its public rhetoric against New Delhi.But the Indian defence establishment is undeterred, with its troops holding the militarily stronger position in the area. "Indian Army's border management posture in the region, which includes the Doka La and Nathu La general areas, is geared to cater for any contingency," said another source.With regard to developments in the Indian Ocean, a Chinese Yuan-class conventional submarine is also prowling the waters, after an operational turnaround in Karachi and backed by support vessel Chongmingdao, since April. This is the seventh Chinese submarine to enter the region—China usually alternates a nuclear submarine with a diesel-electric one — since December 2013, as first reported by TOI in May.Interestingly, a Chinese intelligence-gathering ship Haiwingxing is also reported to have entered IOR last week to snoop on the India-US-Japan Malabar naval exercise in the Bay of Bengal from next week. China has deployed such ships in the past also to keep tabs on the Malabar exercise, which it suspects is a naval grouping aimed to contain its growing influence."The fast pace of construction of the Chinese base and support facility at Djibouti will only add to its capability to sustain its naval units in the IOR," said the source, adding that China's maritime surge in the region might have been planned to dovetail with its push along the sensitive tri-junction area on land.</s>NEW DELHI: India has pushed in more troops in a "non-combative mode" to strengthen its position in an area near Sikkim, where its soldiers have been locked in a standoff with Chinese troops for almost a month now in what has been the longest such impasse between the two armies since 1962.

India brought in more troops after the destruction of two of its bunkers and "aggressive tactics" adopted by the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA), sources said.

In a "non- combative mode", the nozzle of a gun is placed downwards.

Giving details for the first time about the events that preceded the face off between the two armies, the sources said the PLA on June 1 asked the Indian Army to remove the two bunkers set up in 2012 at Lalten in Doka La, which falls in the vicinity of Chumbi Valley at the corner of India-Bhutan- Tibet tri-junction.

The Indian Army, which had been patrolling this area for many years, decided in 2012 that two bunkers would be positioned there as a backup option, besides providing security to the Bhutan-China border.

The Indian Army forward positions informed Sukna-based 33 Corps Headquarter in North Bengal about the Chinese warnings on the bunkers, the sources said.

However, during the night of June 6, two Chinese bulldozers destroyed the bunkers, claiming that the area belonged to China and that India or Bhutan had no right over it, the sources said.

Indian troops on the ground prevented the Chinese men and machines from doing any further damage or transgressing into the area, they said.

Additional forces from nearby brigade headquarters, located 20 km from the face off point, were moved in on June 8 during which a scuffle led to soldiers on both sides suffering minor injuries.

PLA troops were rushed in from its 141 division located in the area, prompting the Indian Army to also strengthen its position.

This is the longest standoff between the two armies since 1962. The last one, which carried on for 21 days, occurred at Daulat Beg Oldie in the Ladakh division of Jammu and Kashmir in 2013, when Chinese troops entered 30 km into Indian territory till the Depsang Plains and claimed it to be a part of its Xinjiang province.

They were, however, pushed back. Sikkim, which became a part of India in May 1976, is the only state which has a demarcated border with China. The lines are based on a treaty signed with the Chinese in 1898.

After the India-China war of 1962, the area where the Indian troops are stationed was placed under the Indian Army and the ITBP, which is the border guarding force and has a camp 15 km from the international border.

As the scuffle broke out between the two sides, the Indian Army rushed an officer of the Major General rank to the area and a flag meeting was sought with the Chinese counterparts.

China rejected two such requests from the Indian side, but accepted the third call for a meeting, where it asked the Indian Army to withdraw its troops from the Lalten area, which falls in Doka La. Doka La is the Indian name for the region which Bhutan recognises as Dokalam, while China claims it to be part of its Donglang region.

As a fallout of the standoff, the Chinese refused to allow the first batch of 47 pilgrims, who were to conduct the annual Kailash Mansarovar Yatra, into Tibet. They also conveyed to the Indian side that visas of another batch of 50 yatris had also been cancelled, the sources said, describing the move as an indication of "increased tempers" in Beijing.

The Sikkim route to Mansarovar, which is in Tibet, was opened in 2015, enabling pilgrims to travel the 1500-km long route from Nathu La to Kailash by buses. It is not the first time that such a transgression has happened at Doka La. The Chinese forces had in November 2008 destroyed some makeshift Indian army bunkers there.

Defence experts believe China wants to exert its dominance over the Chumbi Valley, which is a part of the southern reaches of Tibet.

By claiming the Doka La area, Beijing wants to maximise its geographical advantage so that it can monitor all movements along the India-Bhutan border. China has also increased diplomatic pressure on India and lodged a protest over the alleged "crossing of boundary" by Indian troops in the Sikkim section.

They demanded their immediate withdrawal, as Beijing warned that future visits of Indian pilgrims to Kailash Mansarovar would depend on the resolution of the standoff. "Our position to uphold our territorial sovereignty is unwavering. We hope the Indian side can work with China in the same direction and immediately withdraw the personnel who have overstepped and trespassed into Chinese border," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang had told the media in Beijing last week.

People's Liberation Army spokesman Col Wu Qian also spoke a tough language while making a reference to the 1962 Sino- India conflict, saying that New Delhi should "learn historical lessons". Qian described Indian Army Chief General Bipin Rawat's remarks that India was ready for a "two-and-a-half front war" as "extremely irresponsible" and asked him to "stop clamouring for war".

Rawat had said India was prepared for security threats posed by China, Pakistan as well as by internal threats. "Such rhetoric is extremely irresponsible. We hope that the particular person in the Indian Army could learn from historical lessons and stop such clamouring for war," he had said.

The Defence Minister, Arun Jaitley, made New Delhi's stand clear when he said the India of 2017 was different from that of 1962. "If they are trying to remind us, the situation in 1962 was different and the India of 2017 is different," Jaitley had said when asked about China's warning.

Of the 3,488-km-long India-China border from Jammu and Kashmir to Arunachal Pradesh, a 220-km section falls in Sikkim.</s>The world’s biggest coal users — China, the United States and India — have boosted coal mining in 2017, in an abrupt departure from last year’s record global decline for the heavily polluting fuel and a setback to efforts for reining in climate change emissions.

Mining data reviewed by The Associated Press show that production through May is up by at least 121 million tons, or 6 percent, for the three countries compared to the same period last year. The change is most dramatic in the U.S., where coal mining rose 19 percent in the first five months of the year, according to U.S. Department of Energy data.

Coal’s fortunes had appeared to hit a new low less than two weeks ago, when British energy company BP reported that tonnage mined worldwide fell 6.5 percent in 2016, the largest drop on record. China and the U.S. accounted for almost all the decline, while India showed a slight increase.

The reasons for this year’s turnaround include policy shifts in China, changes in U.S. energy markets and India’s continued push to provide electricity to more of its poor, industry experts said. President Donald Trump’s role as coal’s booster-in-chief in the U.S. has played at most a minor role, they said.

The fuel’s popularity waned over the past several years as renewable power and natural gas made gains and China moved to curb dangerous levels of urban smog from burning coal.

Whether coal’s comeback proves lasting has significant implications for long-term emission reduction targets, and for environmentalists’ hopes that China and India could emerge as leaders in battling climate change.

While the U.S. reversal is expected to prove temporary, analysts agree that India’s use of coal will continue to grow. They’re divided on the forecast for China over the next decade.

Industry representatives say the mining resurgence underscores coal’s continued importance in power generation, though analysts caution its long-term growth prospects remain bleak.

The U.S., China and India combined produce about two-thirds of the coal mined worldwide, and the latter two nations also import coal to meet demand. India’s production expanded even during coal’s global downturn.

“If you look at those three countries, everyone else is irrelevant in the scheme of things,” said Tim Buckley, energy finance director for the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.

Burning coal for power, manufacturing and heat is a primary source of the carbon dioxide emissions that scientists say is driving climate change. Reducing such emissions was a critical piece of the 2015 Paris climate accord that Trump announced this month he wants to exit.

Almost every other nation continues to support the deal, including China and India. China, India and the U.S. produce almost half of global greenhouse gas emissions.

Coal accounts for almost half of greenhouse emissions from burning fossil fuels, according to the Global Carbon Project. China is by far the world’s largest coal user, consuming half the global supply.

China has committed to capping its greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, and some have suggested it might accomplish that up to a decade earlier. Xizhou Zhou, a senior energy analyst with IHS Markit based in Beijing, said the recent uptick in coal production that the AP identified raises doubts about such optimism, but he added that China is still expected to meet its 2030 deadline.

“Coal consumption will continue to increase, mainly driven by Asian countries,” Zhou said. “We’re seeing a recovery starting this year and an increase until the mid-2020s before you see coal plateau globally.”

China’s production rose more than 4 percent through May, according to government figures, compared t o a drop of more than 8 percent for the same period a year earlier.

Hundreds of mines shut down in China last year and the government forced others to cut back hours in a bid to reduce an oversupply of coal and boost prices. The government has since relaxed that policy and production is rebounding.

Also, as China continues to recover from a 2015 economic slowdown, it’s seeing increased manufacturing and new investments in roads, bridges and other projects. That creates more demand for electricity, most of which continues to come from coal even after huge Chinese investments in wind and solar power.

Despite the announced cancellation or suspension of 100 coal plants, others remain under construction, meaning consumption of coal for power will continue to rise, Zhou said. Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam and Pakistan also are building new plants.

In India, where 70 percent of electricity comes from coal, production has long been increasing in defiance of global trends. The country has long argued it has both a right and an obligation to expand power generation as it extends electricity access to hundreds of millions of people who still have none. India also is seeking to reduce its reliance on imported coal by mining more of its own reserves.

An AP review of reports from the Coal Ministry of India found that mining among state-owned companies, which comprise the overwhelming majority of the nation’s production, grew 4 percent in the first five months of this year.

In the U.S., the bulk of the increase occurred in major coal-producing states including Wyoming, Pennsylvania and West Virginia.

Prices for natural gas, a competing fuel in power generation, edged up in early 2017, helping coal, said Andy Roberts of the consulting firm Wood Mackenzie. That’s expected to be a temporary boost given the nation’s huge natural gas supplies. A cold winter in parts of the U.S. also benefited coal by increasing power demand.

World Coal Association Chief Executive Officer Benjamin Sporton acknowledged that it’s been “a difficult few years for coal” but argued that the market remains strong, particularly in China and India.

“All the signs point to (a) positive upward trend,” Sporton told the AP.

Still, coal’s dominant role in providing electricity has been eroding. China now has more renewable energy than any other nation. Its Communist Party leaders have vowed to invest $360 billion in the sector through 2020.

India’s government has said it needs no more coal-powered power plants and last month canceled 13.7 gigawatts in proposed plants, enough to power more than 10 million homes if the plants ran at full capacity. It has promoted renewables with a raft of incentives and declared that power from some solar installations should be used first when demand goes up.

Analysts said India is struggling to adjust to what appears to be a “new normal” — with its growth in electricity capacity outstripping the rise in demand. Manufacturing has not grown as quickly as hoped, and though transmission is steadily expanding to reach more households, 260 million Indians are still off-grid.

As a result, the country’s power plants are running at below 60 percent of capacity on average — down from 2009, when India was using 75 percent of its capacity.

“The private sector is not undertaking any new investment in thermal energy” such as coal plants, said Ashok Khurana, director general of the Association of Power Producers in India. “There’s no sense in it.”

Trump’s advocacy for reviving the coal-mining industry stands as an exception among the three nations’ leaders. Yet the U.S. also is where coal’s rebound could be briefest.

Cheap natural gas, a growing appetite for renewable energy and stricter pollution rules spurred utilities to shut down or announce retirements for several hundred U.S. coal plants. U.S. utilities that invested heavily in alternatives are considered unlikely to revert to coal, Roberts said, meaning market forces and not Trump’s politics will play the biggest role in determining the industry’s future.

Buckley, the energy finance specialist, said he expects the mining increases of 2017 to emerge as an anomaly and global declines will soon resume. But he noted that many existing coal plants will continue operating for years to come.

“We’re not talking about the end of coal tomorrow or the end of coal next decade. We’re talking about a 40-year transition,” he said.</s>The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on Sunday sided with Defence Minister Arun Jaitley even as he brushed aside China's warning which had asked India to ?learn? from the 1962 war and said the former?s statement was ?self-explanatory? as India is now capable of having all self defence.

Arun Jaitley said, ?India of 2017 is different from India of 1962. Those were different situations?

?Whatever our Defence Minister has said it is self-explanatory. It clearly indicates that India is now capable of having all ammunition,? BJP leader Sudhanshu Trivedi told ANI.

A day after China warned India over the ongoing border face-off with an oblique reference of the 1962 war that ended in an Indian defeat, defence minister Arun Jaitley retorted on Friday that the India of 2017 is not what it was 55 years ago.

"If they are trying to remind us, the situation in 1962 was different, the India of today is different," said Jaitley at an event here on Friday, adding that it was "absolutely wrong" for China to try to claim a slice of Bhutanese land in violation of all agreements.

Jaitley further said that Bhutan has appropriately pointed out that China was trying to usurp its land. India is not entering into any other country's land what China is doing, Jaitley said.

Earlier, Bhutan issued a demarche to China yesterday over the construction of a road towards its Army camp in Zomplri area of Doklam and asked Beijing to restore status quo by stopping the work immediately.

On Thursday, the Foreign Ministry of Bhutan issued a statement underlining that the construction of the road inside Bhutanese territory is a direct violation of the 1988 and 1998 agreements between Bhutan and China and affects the process of demarcating the boundary between these two countries. They urged a return to the status quo as before June 16.

(This article has not been edited by DNA's editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)</s>India has slipped to 88th place in terms of money parked by its citizens with Swiss banks, while the UK remains on the top. Also, the money officially held by Indians with banks in Switzerland now accounts for a meagre 0.04 per cent of the total funds kept by all foreign clients in the Swiss banking system, as per an analysis of the latest figures compiled by the SNB (Swiss National Bank) as on 2016-end. India was placed at 75th position in 2015 and at 61st in the year before that, though it used to be among top-50 countries in terms of holdings in Swiss banks till 2007. The country was ranked highest at 37th place in the year 2004.

The latest data from Zurich-based SNB comes ahead of a new framework for automatic exchange of information between Switzerland and India to help check the black money menace. The funds, described by SNB as ‘liabilities’ of Swiss banks or ‘amounts due to’ their clients, are the official figures disclosed by the Swiss authorities and do not indicate to the quantum of the much-debated alleged black money held by Indians in the safe havens of Switzerland.

SNB’s official figures also do not include the money that Indians, NRIs or others might have in Swiss banks in the names of entities from different countries. There is a view that the Indians alleged to have parked their illicit money in Swiss banks in the past may have shifted the funds to other locations after a global clampdown began on the mighty banking secrecy practices in Switzerland.

Swiss banks have also said Indians have “few deposits” in Swiss banks compared to other global financial hubs like Singapore and Hong Kong amid stepped-up efforts to check the black money menace. The total money held in Swiss banks by foreign clients from across the world, incidentally rose by a small margin from 1.41 trillion Swiss francs (CHF) to CHF 1.42 trillion during 2016.

In terms of individual countries, the UK accounted for the largest chunk at about CHF 359 (over 25 per cent) of the total foreign money with Swiss banks. The US came second with nearly CHF 177 billion or about 14 per cent. No other country accounted for a double-digit percentage share, while others in the top-ten included West Indies, France, Bahamas, Germany, Guernsey, Jersey, Hong Kong and Luxembourg.

Indians’ share not even one-hundredth of the total money. India is now ranked 88th with 676 million Swiss francs (about Rs 4,500 crore) — a record low after falling for three consecutive years amid a continuing clampdown on the suspected black money stashed behind their famed secrecy walls.

The share of Indians’ money in the total foreign funds of Swiss banks also fell to 0.04 per cent (from 0.08 per cent in 2015). Pakistan continued to remain placed higher than India at 71st place (although down from 69th in 2015) with about CHF 1.4 billion — though down to below 0.1 per cent of total foreign money parked with Swiss banks. India was also the lowest ranked among the BRICS nations — Russia was ranked 19th (CHF 15.6 billion), China 25th (CHF 9.6 billion), Brazil 52nd (CHF 2.7 billion) and South Africa 61st (CHF 2.2 billion).

Among these five, only China has moved up. Others ranked higher than India included Mauritius, Iran, Morocco, Kenya, Nigeria, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Angola, the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Canada and Mexico.

A number of offshore financial centres are also ranked higher including Cayman Islands, Panama, Cyprus, Marshall Islands, Bermuda, Seychelles, Isle of Man and Gibraltar. Among India’s neighbouring countries, Bangladesh was ranked 89th (CHF 667.5 million), while Nepal was 150th (CHF 312 million), Sri Lanka was 151st (CHF 307 million) and Bhutan was way below at 282nd (about half a million Swiss francs).

The total money belonging to the developed countries fell to CHF 824 billion, while those from developing nations actually rose marginally to CHF 208 million. The money from developing economies in Asia-Pacific region rose to CHF 50 billion. The funds parked in Swiss banks from offshore financial centres rose to CHF 389 billion. India was ranked in top-50 continuously between 1996 and 2007, but started declining after that — 55th in 2008, 59th in 2009 and 2010 each, 55th again in 2011, 71st in 2012 and then to 58th in 2013.
Amid growing tensions between China and India and Bhutan over disputed land, the Bharatiya Janata Party supports the words of defence minster Arun Jaitley that "India of 2017 is different from India of 1962". It follows a warning from China to India that referenced the defeat of the latter during the 1962 Sino-Indian War.