超级军网经济学人：印度能成为强国吗？（三哥非常理智）
来源：百度文库 编辑：超级军网 时间：2024/04/25 22:34:40
Nobody doubts that China has joined the ranks of the greatpowers: the idea of a G2 with America is mooted, albeit prematurely. India isoften spoken of in the same breath as China because of its billion-pluspopulation, economic promise, value as a trading partner and growing militarycapabilities. All five permanent members of the United Nations Security Councilsupport—however grudgingly—India’s claim to join them. But whereas China’s riseis a given, India is still widely seen as a nearly-power that cannot quite getits act together.
没人怀疑中国已经跻身世界强国之列：中美国的G2设想早已被谈及，虽然时机尚未完全成熟。印度因其10+亿的人口、经济发展前景、贸易伙伴的价值和不断增长的军事实力，经常被人拿来和中国相提并论。虽然还有些太情愿，但联合国安理会5个常任理事国也都支持印度入常。中国的崛起已经是不争的事实，而印度通常被看做步调不能协调一致的准强国。
*
That is a pity, for as a great power, India would have much tooffer. Although poorer and less economically dynamic than China, India has softpower in abundance. It is committed to democratic institutions, the rule of lawand human rights. As a victim of jihadist violence, it is in the front rank ofthe fight against terrorism. It has a huge and talented diaspora. It may notwant to be co-opted by the West but it shares many Western values. It isconfident and culturally rich. If it had a permanent Security Council seat(which it has earned by being one of the most consistent contributors to UNpeacekeeping operations) it would not instinctively excuse and defend brutalregimes. Unlike China and Russia, it has few skeletons in its cupboard. Withits enormous coastline and respected navy (rated by its American counterpart,with which it often holds exercises, as up to NATO standard) India iswell-placed to provide security in a critical part of the global commons.
这是印度的悲哀，作为一个大国印度本可以有更大的作为。虽然和中国相比，印度较为贫穷且缺乏经济活力，但印度的软实力更加强大。它致力于改善民主法治和人权。作为圣战活动的受害国，它处在反恐的前沿。它有数量众多才干突出的海外人才。它并不愿意被西方同化，但它的很多价值观和西方的相同。它有丰富的文化传统且充满自信。如果它能成为安理会常任理事国的话（作为联合国维和行动的最积极参与者之一），它本能地不会庇护残暴的政权或者为他们开脱。和中国或者俄罗斯不同，它没有什么见不得人的丑事。凭借着漫长的海岸线和实力不俗的海军（据经常和它一起举行军演的美国评价，已经达到北约标准），印度拥有绝佳的地理位置，可以为世界运输的关键航道提供安全保证。
（备注）联合国维和行动相关情况：
十大主要兵力提供国如下：巴基斯坦（10,173）、孟加拉（9,675）、印度（9,471）、尼泊尔（3,626）、约旦（3,564）、乌拉圭（2,583）、意大利（2,539）、加纳、尼日利亚和法国。
至2008年4月止，100国共有2,468人的兵力在维和过程中死亡，前三如下：印度（127）、加拿大（114）和加纳（113）。
Themodest power
YetIndia’s huge potential to be a force for stability and an upholder of therules-based international system is far from being realised. One big reason isthat the country lacks the culture to pursue an active security policy. Despitea rapidly rising defence budget, forecast to be the world’s fourth-largest by2020, India’s politicians and bureaucrats show little interest in grandstrategy. The foreign service is ridiculously feeble—India’s 1.2 billion peopleare represented by about the same number of diplomats as Singapore’s 5m. Theleadership of the armed forces and the political-bureaucratic establishmentoperate in different worlds. The defence ministry is chronically short ofmilitary expertise.
These weaknesses partly reflect a pragmatic desire to makeeconomic development at home the priority. India has also wisely kept generalsout of politics (a lesson ignored elsewhere in Asia, not least by Pakistan,with usually parlous results). But Nehruvian ideology also plays a role. Athome, India mercifully gave up Fabian economics in the 1990s (and reaped therewards). But diplomatically, 66 years after the British left, it still clingsto the post-independence creeds of semi-pacifism and “non-alignment”: the Westis not to be trusted.
India’s tradition of strategic restraint has in some ways servedthe country well. Having little to show for several limited wars with Pakistanand one with China, India tends to respond to provocations with caution. It haslong-running territorial disputes with both its big neighbours, but it usuallytries not to inflame them (although it censors any maps which accurately depictwhere the border lies, something its press shamefully tolerates). India doesnot go looking for trouble, and that has generally been to its advantage.
谦逊的大国
然而，印度成为世界稳定和国际秩序维护者的巨大潜能还远没有变成现实。一个很大的原因就是印度缺乏推行积极安全政策的文化。虽然印度军费在快速增长，预计到2020年将成为世界第四大军费支出大国，但印度的政治家和整体官僚机构对宏观战略缺乏兴趣。外事服务部门更是小得可怜，作为一个拥有12亿人口的大国，其外交人员的数量竟然和只有500万人口的新加坡差不多。印度武装部队和政治官僚机构的运作机制截然不同。国防部长一直都是军事技能不足的人员担任。
这或多或少反映了印度将发展国内经济作为优先考虑的实用主义想法。印度同样很明智地要求军人不得干政（在亚洲地区这点被忽略，在巴基斯坦这常常造成局势动荡）。但尼赫鲁主义仍然在发挥作用。在国内问题上，印度上世纪90年代明智地放弃了费边主义经济学并取得了成果；而在外交事务上，虽然已从英国独立出来66年了，但它仍然固守和平主义和不结盟主义的信条：西方不可信。
(译注：费边主义的主张是社会主义，其手段则为渐进主义。)
印度的战略克制传统理念对国家起到了一些良好的作用。在与巴基斯坦的几场战争和中国的一次战争中，印度都倾向于用克制来面对挑衅。印度和这两个大的邻国的领土纠纷由来已久，但它一直都试图不去挑起他们的怒火（不过它对任何清晰标明边界的地图进行审核，而这点它们的出版社居然可耻地接受了）。印度看起来不像是个麻烦制造者，这点也对它有利
评论巨多，按照时间顺序翻译了部分：
Will@MoorMar27th, 16:24
It is wishful thinking that Indiawould be a great power with a clear strategy about future, yet still doesnothing against the will of the West.
Maybe latter than China, Indiawould start to give the West some headache, although not necessarily directconflict. And it has not THAT much to do about being democracy or not.
Once a powerful country forged,you'd learn to deal with it. And it will not be easy.
This article is so much easily tobe summarized: Oh man, we hope that we could switch India and China! PuttingIndia in the big five in UN, etc. But in that case, maybe India will be moreassertive and more demanding. And U.S. will always want to tackle the secondpower.
对未来拥有明确战略的印度会成为一个强国，而且还不会和西方的想法相悖，这真是一个美好的愿望。
可能比中国晚点，但印度会开始让西方感到头疼的，即便不一定是正面冲突。这可和民主与否没多大关系。
一旦一个强国开始崛起，你就必须学会如何和它共处，而这并不容易。
这篇文章用人话来说就是：我们希望把印度和中国对调一下！把印度拉进5大常委的席位等等。不过那样一来的话，或许印度会变得更加自信和要求更多。然后美国又要习惯性地遏制老二了。
GOTTMITUNS✠1870inreply to Will@MoorMar 27th, 17:14
It's also interesting to notethat in the eraly 80's, people said that Japan would become a superpowerbecause of population growth and technological advantages, and also said itwould overtake the USA as largest economy in 2000.
The bubble bursted and now Japanhas a declining population and deflation.
China and India are actually toolarge. I do not doubt that they have the power to manage their issues, but theyare culturally and socially divided - especially India. The EU looks like auniculturalist bloc with only a small gap between rich and poor in comparison.
Earth was hardly able to feed onebillion people in the West. I doubt we can offer two, three, seven billionpeople the living standards they want. What glues societies like China andIndia together is the hope that the tomorrow will be better than the present,and that all people will end up in those impressive skyscrapers at the Chinesecoast.
When they realize that thiscannot happen, it will be the source of disturbance. People will just call forsocialism like they did in the West.
有个很有趣的事实：上世纪80年代早期，因为日本的人口增长和技术优势，大家都说它会成为超级大国，还说它会在2000年赶上最大经济体美国。
泡沫破裂之后，现在的日本面临人口减少和经济通缩问题。
中国和印度太大了。我不怀疑它们解决自身事务的能力，但是它们面临文化和社会割裂的问题——尤其是印度。欧盟则在文化上是统一的，只不过在贫富之间存在差距而已。
地球的资源负担西方的10亿人口已经非常吃力了，我想我们没有能力让20、30甚至70亿人口都过上他们想要的生活。让中国和印度社会凝聚起来的动力是未来会比现在更好的希望，他们认为都能在中国海边的令人瞩目的高楼大厦里生活。
一旦他们意识到这个希望无法实现的时候，动荡就可能发生。他们会像现在西方社会的人那样要求实行社会主义。
k_canadainreply to Will@MoorMar 27th, 19:29
Good points.
说得好。
discovery1Mar27th, 17:37
I just want to say that I reallylike the picture that goes with this article.
我只想说我很喜欢文章的配图。
Will@MoorMar27th, 17:49
"Most of all, though, Indianeeds to give up its outdated philosophy of non-alignment. "
I think the non-alignment shouldbe the policy of all powers, including US, China and India. Alignment has beenone of the biggest reasons that has pushed the world into WWI and WWII.
“最重要的是印度应该抛弃过时的不结盟理念”。我认为不结盟理念应该是包括美国、中国和印度在内的所有大国的政策。国家联盟是导致第一、二次世界大战的最大原因之一。
Joshua TreeMar27th, 17:53
I find it difficult to fathom acountry as a "great power" with supra-regional ambitions which looksso poorly after its own people as India does.
像印度这样超越所在地区的野心但国内民众如此可怜的所谓“强国”，真是让人难以理解。
Zaphod_KMar27th, 18:03
Maybe India could instead try tobe an example for the rest of the world with its philosophy of non-alignment,non-violence, and not "looking for trouble" (as the author puts it).Maybe the Indian political elite is more strategic than the author gives themcredit for - they have observed what has occurred in their neighboringcountries by "strategically aligning" with the West (read Pakistan,Afghanistan), and want to steer clear of playing puppet and focus onself-development, without needing to play second to anyone in the long-run. Itsa sensible strategy.
或许印度可以给外界做一个不结盟、非暴力、非“麻烦制造者”（如作者所说）的表率。或许印度政治精英比作者评价的更加高瞻远瞩——他们对和西方“战略结盟”的邻国所发生的情况非常清楚，他们想要避免被操控而专注于自身发展，不用长期扮演老二角色。这是明智的战略。
k_canadainreply to Zaphod_KMar 27th, 18:47
Well said Zaphod_K
说得好。
k_canadaMar27th, 18:58
I agree with both @skepticji and@Zaphod_K's observations on India. I would like to add to these points bysaying that there are two avenues that India should aggressively pursue (alongwith the whole raft of other things that they need to focus on) that will helpits long-term strategic objectives.
The first is self-reliance in thearea of energy. Given its geographic location and its natural strengths(tropical climate, biodiversity), India has a golden opportunity to become aleader in energy innovation (particularly in the area of green energy). Thiswill allow for reduced dependence on the imports of oil and will strengthenIndia's hand vis a vis its neighbours and the West.
The second area would beinvestment in the navy. I think it's critical that India focus on strengtheningits navy to ensure a strong presence in the Indian Ocean.
我赞同楼上两位对印度的观点。但我想补充说说印度应该努力做到的两点（和其它他们需要全力以赴的一样），这将有助于他们实现长期战略。
第一就是能源自给。鉴于印度的地理位置和自身自然环境（热带气候、丰富的自然多样性），印度有绝佳机会成为能源革命的领头羊（尤其是在绿色能源领域）。这能让印度减少对进口石油的依赖，并增强它和邻国及西方抗衡的能力。第二就是加大海军投入。我想印度加大海军投入以确保其在印度洋的强大存在是至关重要的。
In the long runMar27th, 19:11
What a dumb article. Indians needto spend billions on defense like they need a hole in the head.
India has a multitude of problemsinternally. We're not even talking about education or jobs, this is a countrythat cannot even provide clean toilets, reliable energy or clean drinking wateror basic infrastructure for 80% of its population. Such a country has nobusiness trying to be a world superpower. And only a country that is stupidbeyond believe or suicidal would want to invade a poverty stricken hell holelike India, with no natural resources to speak of and a billion hungry people.While I wouldn't put it pass the US or any NATO country to make such a dumbmove, the Chinese are a lot smarter.
This article is nothing more thana sales pitch for the US defense industry. If Indians have any brain they'd dowell to ignore it and go about what they do everyday, which is trying to makelife better for themselves and their family. Forget trying to be a tool forwestern powers.
什么垃圾文章。印度在国防上投入数十亿纯粹是脑子进水了。
印度有很多的国内问题。别说什么教育或者就业问题了，他们80%的人口连干净的厕所、可靠的能源、干净的饮用水和基础设施都没有。这样的国家别想做什么世界超级大国。而且除非是疯了或者是想自杀，否则没有国家想要侵略毫无自然资源可言且有着10亿饥饿人口的见鬼的穷国印度。我不相信美国或者任何北约国家会采取这么愚蠢的行动，中国则聪明得多了不用提了。
这篇文章纯粹是美国的军工产业推销软文。印度人只要稍有点脑子的话，就应该不搭理这文章然后正常干每天干的事情，为自己和国家更好的未来努力。别成为西方强国的工具。
RajaPoruinreply to In the long runMar 27th, 23:55
Bingo ! Dead on ！！
说的太对了！
AussieLouisinreply to In the long runMar 28th, 05:24
Perhaps the author of thisarticle, if he truly cares about Indians, could persuade Britain to return someof the much needed treasures it stole from India.
If nothing else, it would help tokeep some of the toilets clean, so more tourists could come and gawd!
如果这篇文章的作者真的关心印度的话，他应该说服英国归还从印度偷走的金银财宝。
不出什么以外的话，这有助于他们保持厕所的整洁，这样一来会有更多的观光客。
HeSaidWhat...inreply to AussieLouisMar 28th, 06:48
Agreed. The British can start withreturning the crown jewel to India. Greek statues to Greece... These countriesneed them a lot more than Westminster.
是的，英国应该先把女王皇冠上的钻石还给印度，把希腊的雕像还给希腊……他们比白金汉宫更需要这些珍宝。
VodkaredbullMar27th, 20:26
The future of the world will liein the realm of multilateralism and non-alignment. India, more than any othercountry understands this. The writer should rather understand that alignmentand the whole idea of being a superpower, is instead "obsolete."
世界的未来会是多极和不结盟的，印度比其他任何国家都更了解这点。作者应该明白结盟和成为超级大国的理念是落伍的。
RajaPoruinreply to VodkaredbullMar 27th, 23:51
Wow ! Let me sell you someswampland !
天那！你这个傻瓜！
Connect The DotsMar27th, 20:38
The mistake is lumping India withthe East Asian Confucian Economies.
Japan, Taiwan, South Korea,Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan are high tech and high income modern economies.
China will eventually emulate andapproach the modernity, quality of life and wage parity of the 4 Tigers.
But China is bigger than all ofthem combined--and doubled.
India is a SubcontinentalIndo-Asian Economy.
India's peers are Pakistan, SriLanka, and Bangladesh.
Combined in population, theSubcontinent accounts for one-third of humanity.
More hunger than Africa.
More shortage of clean water andtoilets than Africa.
More poverty than Africa.
And receiving more NGO Aid thanAfrica.
In the Subcontinent, India is theleader of the pack.
But compared to the ConfucianAsian Economies, India is a distant laggard.
India is booming, no differentthan other neighbors of China that reciprocate trade with the booming Chineseeconomy. India is growing fast but at no better rates than South Korea, Taiwan,Singapore, Vietnam, Cambodia, Myanmar, Tibet and Russia.
And it is wrong and futile tocompare India to China.
They are both Asian but indifferent universes.
It is the difference betweenConfucianism and Hinduism.
文章的错误就在于将印度和东亚儒家圈的经济混为一谈了。
日本、台湾（地区）、韩国、新加坡、香港和台湾（地区，台湾重复了啊）拥有较高的技术水平和高收益的现代经济模式。中国最终会效仿并实现现代化，人民生活质量和工资待遇会和四小虎的水平相当。
但是中国（的经济规模）比它们所有加起来的两倍还大。
而印度则是印度次大陆的经济模式。
和印度同等层次的是巴基斯坦、斯里兰卡和孟加拉国。
印度次大陆的总人口是世界人口的1/3。
比非洲的饥饿人数多。
比非洲还更欠缺干净水和厕所。
比非洲贫穷。
接受的非政府援助比非洲还多。
在次大陆区域，印度算是领头羊。
但是和亚洲儒家圈相比，印度落后的太多了。
印度和中国的其他邻国一样，因为受到迅速增长的中国经济的提携而快速发展。印度的经济增速并不比韩国、台湾（地区）、新加坡、越南、柬埔寨、缅甸、XZ（地区）和俄罗斯快。
而把印度拿来和中国相比是错误的，也是毫无意义的。
他们同处亚洲但截然不同。
这就是儒学和印度教的区别。
DavidFrawleyinreply to Connect The DotsMar 27th, 20:50
All you did was conflate a lot ofissues with Hinduism. India is yet to become a Hindu nation with Hindu values.India has been denying its Hindu identity ever since that brown Englishman,Hindu-loathing Nehru become Prime Minister.
你过多地把所有问题推给了印度教。印度没有变成印度教价值观为主的印度教国家。从棕色皮肤讨厌印度教的英国人尼赫鲁成为总理以来，印度就已经否认了它身上的印度教标签。
MostJustWantPeaceinreply to DavidFrawleyMar 27th, 22:40
Is Nehru considered a "brownEnglishman" because of his trysts with Lord Mountbatten's wife?
是不是因为尼赫鲁和蒙巴顿公爵的夫人约会，所以就被认为是“棕色皮肤的英国人”？
RajaPoruinreply to Connect The DotsMar 27th, 23:45
.... and Confucianism is waysuperior, bro !
……儒学更高端，兄弟！
RajaPoruinreply to MostJustWantPeaceMar 27th, 23:49
Very clever ! Mountbatten's wifewas English. For a tryst, a discriminating person would not select anEnglishwoman, perfect though they may be in all other respects. Personally, anAmerican lady would be far better and more delightful and totally unforgettableor more lovable, but I digress. Nehru was just fine. One always emulates theculture of the conqueror. It's how life is. Get used to it.
真聪明！蒙巴顿的夫人是英国人。从约会的角度来说，一个明智的人是不会选择英国女人的，虽然她可能在其他方面都很优秀。我个人认为英国女人非常好而且讨人喜欢、令人难忘或者很可爱，哦我扯远了。尼赫鲁挺不错的，他努力去效仿征服者的文明。这就是生活，你要习惯它。
GodricGriffindorinreply to Connect The DotsMar 28th, 01:00
You seem to have a verysuperficial outlook towards India. I don't see how a country's peers arerelated to its development. So lets say Israel is in a parallel universe simplybecause its neighbors are socially backward Arab states.
你对印度的认识非常肤浅。我不明白一个国家的层次和它的发展水平有什么关系。如果要这么说的话，以色列就是在平行宇宙中（译注：非现实的），要知道它的邻国都是落后的阿拉伯国家。
Connect The Dotsinreply to GodricGriffindorMar 28th, 13:34
It is not simply peers...it isculture, religion, personal industry, education, use of capital, innovation andthe gene pool.
Arabs and Israelis agree they areday and night in ANY meaningful comparison.
Indians, Pakistani and SriLankans are one big gene pool and Hindustan culture. Less than one generationago they were one big united country in the Empire.
这不是简单的类比……它涉及到文化、宗教信仰、小工业、教育、资金利用、创新精神和遗传基因等方方面面。
阿拉伯和以色列都会认同无论从任何方面来对比，它们都处在不同层面。
印度、巴基斯坦和斯里兰卡的人种遗传基因是同源的，而且同处印度教文化圈。上一代人的时候它们还都在同一个帝国的统治之下呢。
AshishMar27th, 20:58
We need to improve DomesticInfrastructure first before We Bother with becoming a Great power!!!
What a Silly Article!
在想着成为强国之前，我们要先改善国内基础设施！！！
这狗屁文章！
DavidFrawleyMar27th, 21:11
The Economist is as condescendingas ever when it comes to India. It still imagines that it can dictate to 'itscolony'. This is the result of never really letting go of the 'crown jewel' ofthe British Empire which would not have amounted to much had the British notraped, looted, subjugated and practised genocide in India. But alas, it is an independentnation. The British rewrote history that was pure fiction and propaganda; itsought to deny the great history of the Hindu nation that gave the world muchof its civilisation, maths and science and its values.
By stating that India shares'western values' is akin to putting the cart before the horse; it is the westthat has taken on Indian-Hindu values. Modern Christianity, which is still awork in progress resembled more the Islam of today for at least a 1000 years.
India will become a state definedby Hinduism; which is the world's only truly universal ethos. The era ofdenying and trivialising Hindus is almost at an end. Congress Party of India ishindering India's and the world's material and spiritual growth.
一谈到印度经济学人就惺惺作态起来了。似乎还在对它的“殖民地”发号施令。这就是没有摘下大英帝国“王冠上的珠宝”的结果，似乎英国从来没有在印度强奸、劫掠、侵略和大规模屠杀似的。但是现在印度成了独立国家了，于是英国改写历史，一派胡言。它否认印度向世界输出文化、数学、科学和价值观的伟大历史。说什么印度拥有共同的“西方价值观”完全是颠倒黑白，其实是西方接受了印度教价值观。现代基督教文明更像是1000年前至今未变的伊斯兰文明。
印度会成为一个印度教国家，印度教文明是唯一的普世价值观。否认和平庸化印度教文明的时代结束了。印度国大党阻碍了印度和全世界的物质和精神的进步发展。
Curate's Egginreply to DavidFrawleyMar 27th, 23:24
Relax, my religious extremistpal, the Economist is a newspaper, and therefore it can write about any countryanywhere in the world.
Your logic would have you forbida German newspaper saying ANYTHING about Israel. Not much of a logic, is it?
放松点，宗教偏执狂。经济学人是新闻媒体，所以它们想写哪个国家就写哪个国家。
按照你的逻辑，德国的媒体就不能对以色列做出任何评价。这不科学是吧？
RajaPoruinreply to DavidFrawleyMar 27th, 23:44
Hinduism is just the Taliban witha darker skin, except for the very superior Brahmins who look like Albanians.
印度教就是黑皮肤的塔利班，除了上层人士之外，他们看着像阿尔巴尼亚人。
AussieLouisinreply to DavidFrawleyMar 28th, 05:07
"This is the result of neverreally letting go of the 'crown jewel' of the British Empire which would nothave amounted to much had the British not raped, looted, subjugated andpractised genocide in India."
Truth be told, the treasures ofBritain are mostly Indian treasures, stolen whilst they were doing the above.They stole largely too from China and the Chinese are now devising ways to getsome of their British-looted treasures back. This is getting the Britishworried and thus their prayers and hopes that China would never be powerfulenough to demand it! Thus their incessant and obsessive fault-finding withChina's remarkable economic development and anything Chinese, as observable bythe typically anti-Chinese tenor of this article.
It always puzzled me why theIndians never thought of wanting their treasures back. Even the little Greeknation wants back the so-called Elgin marble, pieces of rock writing importantto Greek historical heritage, shamelessly taken back to Britain by a typicalkleptomaniac Britisher whom they elevated to a Lord; my word!
Perhaps, there's somethinglacking in Indian pride when looking up at their past masters?
说实话，英国的大部分财产都是它在印度干那些坏事的时候劫来的。他们在中国也抢了不少，现在中国人正想法设法要回这些赃物。这让英国人很紧张，所以他们就祈祷并希望中国永远不要强大到能够索回赃物的时候！因此他们没完没了地在中国令人瞩目的经济成就和任何事情上挑刺，比如很明显地在这篇文章中的反中论调。
我一直有一个疑问，为什么印度不要回他们的珍宝呢？就连小国希腊都要求英国归还埃尔金大理石雕像，一块希腊重要历史遗产的小石块，一个被他们选为国王的英国盗窃狂可耻地从希腊夺走带回到英国，苍天呐！
或许在面对前主人时，印度人少了点自尊心？
MostJustWantPeaceinreply to AussieLouisMar 28th, 06:03
I think the first treasure Chinashould demand back are the collection of texts form the Mogao Caves inDunhuang. This collection includes a Chinese translation of the Diamond Sutra,the oldest surviving printed book in the world!
我觉得中国要求英国归还的第一件珍宝就是敦煌莫高窟出土的书册。这些书册中包括《金刚经》的汉译本，全世界最早的印刷版图书！
biswajitroyinreply to AussieLouisMar 28th, 13:30
For an estimate, British empirehad generated revenue from India to the tune of 8 trillion us dollars adjustedfor inflation over 200 years rule.
据估算，大英帝国在200年的统治时期内，从印度掠走的财产根据通货膨胀系数修正后达到8万亿美元。
biswajitroyinreply to MostJustWantPeaceMar 28th, 13:31
diamond sutra interesting, is itrelated to the kama sutra?
《金刚经》，很有意思，和《性爱宝典》有什么联系吗？
http://www.ltaaa.com/wtfy/8216.html
Nobody doubts that China has joined the ranks of the greatpowers: the idea of a G2 with America is mooted, albeit prematurely. India isoften spoken of in the same breath as China because of its billion-pluspopulation, economic promise, value as a trading partner and growing militarycapabilities. All five permanent members of the United Nations Security Councilsupport—however grudgingly—India’s claim to join them. But whereas China’s riseis a given, India is still widely seen as a nearly-power that cannot quite getits act together.
没人怀疑中国已经跻身世界强国之列：中美国的G2设想早已被谈及，虽然时机尚未完全成熟。印度因其10+亿的人口、经济发展前景、贸易伙伴的价值和不断增长的军事实力，经常被人拿来和中国相提并论。虽然还有些太情愿，但联合国安理会5个常任理事国也都支持印度入常。中国的崛起已经是不争的事实，而印度通常被看做步调不能协调一致的准强国。
*
That is a pity, for as a great power, India would have much tooffer. Although poorer and less economically dynamic than China, India has softpower in abundance. It is committed to democratic institutions, the rule of lawand human rights. As a victim of jihadist violence, it is in the front rank ofthe fight against terrorism. It has a huge and talented diaspora. It may notwant to be co-opted by the West but it shares many Western values. It isconfident and culturally rich. If it had a permanent Security Council seat(which it has earned by being one of the most consistent contributors to UNpeacekeeping operations) it would not instinctively excuse and defend brutalregimes. Unlike China and Russia, it has few skeletons in its cupboard. Withits enormous coastline and respected navy (rated by its American counterpart,with which it often holds exercises, as up to NATO standard) India iswell-placed to provide security in a critical part of the global commons.
这是印度的悲哀，作为一个大国印度本可以有更大的作为。虽然和中国相比，印度较为贫穷且缺乏经济活力，但印度的软实力更加强大。它致力于改善民主法治和人权。作为圣战活动的受害国，它处在反恐的前沿。它有数量众多才干突出的海外人才。它并不愿意被西方同化，但它的很多价值观和西方的相同。它有丰富的文化传统且充满自信。如果它能成为安理会常任理事国的话（作为联合国维和行动的最积极参与者之一），它本能地不会庇护残暴的政权或者为他们开脱。和中国或者俄罗斯不同，它没有什么见不得人的丑事。凭借着漫长的海岸线和实力不俗的海军（据经常和它一起举行军演的美国评价，已经达到北约标准），印度拥有绝佳的地理位置，可以为世界运输的关键航道提供安全保证。
（备注）联合国维和行动相关情况：
十大主要兵力提供国如下：巴基斯坦（10,173）、孟加拉（9,675）、印度（9,471）、尼泊尔（3,626）、约旦（3,564）、乌拉圭（2,583）、意大利（2,539）、加纳、尼日利亚和法国。
至2008年4月止，100国共有2,468人的兵力在维和过程中死亡，前三如下：印度（127）、加拿大（114）和加纳（113）。
Themodest power
YetIndia’s huge potential to be a force for stability and an upholder of therules-based international system is far from being realised. One big reason isthat the country lacks the culture to pursue an active security policy. Despitea rapidly rising defence budget, forecast to be the world’s fourth-largest by2020, India’s politicians and bureaucrats show little interest in grandstrategy. The foreign service is ridiculously feeble—India’s 1.2 billion peopleare represented by about the same number of diplomats as Singapore’s 5m. Theleadership of the armed forces and the political-bureaucratic establishmentoperate in different worlds. The defence ministry is chronically short ofmilitary expertise.
These weaknesses partly reflect a pragmatic desire to makeeconomic development at home the priority. India has also wisely kept generalsout of politics (a lesson ignored elsewhere in Asia, not least by Pakistan,with usually parlous results). But Nehruvian ideology also plays a role. Athome, India mercifully gave up Fabian economics in the 1990s (and reaped therewards). But diplomatically, 66 years after the British left, it still clingsto the post-independence creeds of semi-pacifism and “non-alignment”: the Westis not to be trusted.
India’s tradition of strategic restraint has in some ways servedthe country well. Having little to show for several limited wars with Pakistanand one with China, India tends to respond to provocations with caution. It haslong-running territorial disputes with both its big neighbours, but it usuallytries not to inflame them (although it censors any maps which accurately depictwhere the border lies, something its press shamefully tolerates). India doesnot go looking for trouble, and that has generally been to its advantage.
谦逊的大国
然而，印度成为世界稳定和国际秩序维护者的巨大潜能还远没有变成现实。一个很大的原因就是印度缺乏推行积极安全政策的文化。虽然印度军费在快速增长，预计到2020年将成为世界第四大军费支出大国，但印度的政治家和整体官僚机构对宏观战略缺乏兴趣。外事服务部门更是小得可怜，作为一个拥有12亿人口的大国，其外交人员的数量竟然和只有500万人口的新加坡差不多。印度武装部队和政治官僚机构的运作机制截然不同。国防部长一直都是军事技能不足的人员担任。
这或多或少反映了印度将发展国内经济作为优先考虑的实用主义想法。印度同样很明智地要求军人不得干政（在亚洲地区这点被忽略，在巴基斯坦这常常造成局势动荡）。但尼赫鲁主义仍然在发挥作用。在国内问题上，印度上世纪90年代明智地放弃了费边主义经济学并取得了成果；而在外交事务上，虽然已从英国独立出来66年了，但它仍然固守和平主义和不结盟主义的信条：西方不可信。
(译注：费边主义的主张是社会主义，其手段则为渐进主义。)
印度的战略克制传统理念对国家起到了一些良好的作用。在与巴基斯坦的几场战争和中国的一次战争中，印度都倾向于用克制来面对挑衅。印度和这两个大的邻国的领土纠纷由来已久，但它一直都试图不去挑起他们的怒火（不过它对任何清晰标明边界的地图进行审核，而这点它们的出版社居然可耻地接受了）。印度看起来不像是个麻烦制造者，这点也对它有利
评论巨多，按照时间顺序翻译了部分：
Will@MoorMar27th, 16:24
It is wishful thinking that Indiawould be a great power with a clear strategy about future, yet still doesnothing against the will of the West.
Maybe latter than China, Indiawould start to give the West some headache, although not necessarily directconflict. And it has not THAT much to do about being democracy or not.
Once a powerful country forged,you'd learn to deal with it. And it will not be easy.
This article is so much easily tobe summarized: Oh man, we hope that we could switch India and China! PuttingIndia in the big five in UN, etc. But in that case, maybe India will be moreassertive and more demanding. And U.S. will always want to tackle the secondpower.
对未来拥有明确战略的印度会成为一个强国，而且还不会和西方的想法相悖，这真是一个美好的愿望。
可能比中国晚点，但印度会开始让西方感到头疼的，即便不一定是正面冲突。这可和民主与否没多大关系。
一旦一个强国开始崛起，你就必须学会如何和它共处，而这并不容易。
这篇文章用人话来说就是：我们希望把印度和中国对调一下！把印度拉进5大常委的席位等等。不过那样一来的话，或许印度会变得更加自信和要求更多。然后美国又要习惯性地遏制老二了。
GOTTMITUNS✠1870inreply to Will@MoorMar 27th, 17:14
It's also interesting to notethat in the eraly 80's, people said that Japan would become a superpowerbecause of population growth and technological advantages, and also said itwould overtake the USA as largest economy in 2000.
The bubble bursted and now Japanhas a declining population and deflation.
China and India are actually toolarge. I do not doubt that they have the power to manage their issues, but theyare culturally and socially divided - especially India. The EU looks like auniculturalist bloc with only a small gap between rich and poor in comparison.
Earth was hardly able to feed onebillion people in the West. I doubt we can offer two, three, seven billionpeople the living standards they want. What glues societies like China andIndia together is the hope that the tomorrow will be better than the present,and that all people will end up in those impressive skyscrapers at the Chinesecoast.
When they realize that thiscannot happen, it will be the source of disturbance. People will just call forsocialism like they did in the West.
有个很有趣的事实：上世纪80年代早期，因为日本的人口增长和技术优势，大家都说它会成为超级大国，还说它会在2000年赶上最大经济体美国。
泡沫破裂之后，现在的日本面临人口减少和经济通缩问题。
中国和印度太大了。我不怀疑它们解决自身事务的能力，但是它们面临文化和社会割裂的问题——尤其是印度。欧盟则在文化上是统一的，只不过在贫富之间存在差距而已。
地球的资源负担西方的10亿人口已经非常吃力了，我想我们没有能力让20、30甚至70亿人口都过上他们想要的生活。让中国和印度社会凝聚起来的动力是未来会比现在更好的希望，他们认为都能在中国海边的令人瞩目的高楼大厦里生活。
一旦他们意识到这个希望无法实现的时候，动荡就可能发生。他们会像现在西方社会的人那样要求实行社会主义。
k_canadainreply to Will@MoorMar 27th, 19:29
Good points.
说得好。
discovery1Mar27th, 17:37
I just want to say that I reallylike the picture that goes with this article.
我只想说我很喜欢文章的配图。
Will@MoorMar27th, 17:49
"Most of all, though, Indianeeds to give up its outdated philosophy of non-alignment. "
I think the non-alignment shouldbe the policy of all powers, including US, China and India. Alignment has beenone of the biggest reasons that has pushed the world into WWI and WWII.
“最重要的是印度应该抛弃过时的不结盟理念”。我认为不结盟理念应该是包括美国、中国和印度在内的所有大国的政策。国家联盟是导致第一、二次世界大战的最大原因之一。
Joshua TreeMar27th, 17:53
I find it difficult to fathom acountry as a "great power" with supra-regional ambitions which looksso poorly after its own people as India does.
像印度这样超越所在地区的野心但国内民众如此可怜的所谓“强国”，真是让人难以理解。
Zaphod_KMar27th, 18:03
Maybe India could instead try tobe an example for the rest of the world with its philosophy of non-alignment,non-violence, and not "looking for trouble" (as the author puts it).Maybe the Indian political elite is more strategic than the author gives themcredit for - they have observed what has occurred in their neighboringcountries by "strategically aligning" with the West (read Pakistan,Afghanistan), and want to steer clear of playing puppet and focus onself-development, without needing to play second to anyone in the long-run. Itsa sensible strategy.
或许印度可以给外界做一个不结盟、非暴力、非“麻烦制造者”（如作者所说）的表率。或许印度政治精英比作者评价的更加高瞻远瞩——他们对和西方“战略结盟”的邻国所发生的情况非常清楚，他们想要避免被操控而专注于自身发展，不用长期扮演老二角色。这是明智的战略。
k_canadainreply to Zaphod_KMar 27th, 18:47
Well said Zaphod_K
说得好。
k_canadaMar27th, 18:58
I agree with both @skepticji and@Zaphod_K's observations on India. I would like to add to these points bysaying that there are two avenues that India should aggressively pursue (alongwith the whole raft of other things that they need to focus on) that will helpits long-term strategic objectives.
The first is self-reliance in thearea of energy. Given its geographic location and its natural strengths(tropical climate, biodiversity), India has a golden opportunity to become aleader in energy innovation (particularly in the area of green energy). Thiswill allow for reduced dependence on the imports of oil and will strengthenIndia's hand vis a vis its neighbours and the West.
The second area would beinvestment in the navy. I think it's critical that India focus on strengtheningits navy to ensure a strong presence in the Indian Ocean.
我赞同楼上两位对印度的观点。但我想补充说说印度应该努力做到的两点（和其它他们需要全力以赴的一样），这将有助于他们实现长期战略。
第一就是能源自给。鉴于印度的地理位置和自身自然环境（热带气候、丰富的自然多样性），印度有绝佳机会成为能源革命的领头羊（尤其是在绿色能源领域）。这能让印度减少对进口石油的依赖，并增强它和邻国及西方抗衡的能力。第二就是加大海军投入。我想印度加大海军投入以确保其在印度洋的强大存在是至关重要的。
In the long runMar27th, 19:11
What a dumb article. Indians needto spend billions on defense like they need a hole in the head.
India has a multitude of problemsinternally. We're not even talking about education or jobs, this is a countrythat cannot even provide clean toilets, reliable energy or clean drinking wateror basic infrastructure for 80% of its population. Such a country has nobusiness trying to be a world superpower. And only a country that is stupidbeyond believe or suicidal would want to invade a poverty stricken hell holelike India, with no natural resources to speak of and a billion hungry people.While I wouldn't put it pass the US or any NATO country to make such a dumbmove, the Chinese are a lot smarter.
This article is nothing more thana sales pitch for the US defense industry. If Indians have any brain they'd dowell to ignore it and go about what they do everyday, which is trying to makelife better for themselves and their family. Forget trying to be a tool forwestern powers.
什么垃圾文章。印度在国防上投入数十亿纯粹是脑子进水了。
印度有很多的国内问题。别说什么教育或者就业问题了，他们80%的人口连干净的厕所、可靠的能源、干净的饮用水和基础设施都没有。这样的国家别想做什么世界超级大国。而且除非是疯了或者是想自杀，否则没有国家想要侵略毫无自然资源可言且有着10亿饥饿人口的见鬼的穷国印度。我不相信美国或者任何北约国家会采取这么愚蠢的行动，中国则聪明得多了不用提了。
这篇文章纯粹是美国的军工产业推销软文。印度人只要稍有点脑子的话，就应该不搭理这文章然后正常干每天干的事情，为自己和国家更好的未来努力。别成为西方强国的工具。
RajaPoruinreply to In the long runMar 27th, 23:55
Bingo ! Dead on ！！
说的太对了！
AussieLouisinreply to In the long runMar 28th, 05:24
Perhaps the author of thisarticle, if he truly cares about Indians, could persuade Britain to return someof the much needed treasures it stole from India.
If nothing else, it would help tokeep some of the toilets clean, so more tourists could come and gawd!
如果这篇文章的作者真的关心印度的话，他应该说服英国归还从印度偷走的金银财宝。
不出什么以外的话，这有助于他们保持厕所的整洁，这样一来会有更多的观光客。
HeSaidWhat...inreply to AussieLouisMar 28th, 06:48
Agreed. The British can start withreturning the crown jewel to India. Greek statues to Greece... These countriesneed them a lot more than Westminster.
是的，英国应该先把女王皇冠上的钻石还给印度，把希腊的雕像还给希腊……他们比白金汉宫更需要这些珍宝。
VodkaredbullMar27th, 20:26
The future of the world will liein the realm of multilateralism and non-alignment. India, more than any othercountry understands this. The writer should rather understand that alignmentand the whole idea of being a superpower, is instead "obsolete."
世界的未来会是多极和不结盟的，印度比其他任何国家都更了解这点。作者应该明白结盟和成为超级大国的理念是落伍的。
RajaPoruinreply to VodkaredbullMar 27th, 23:51
Wow ! Let me sell you someswampland !
天那！你这个傻瓜！
Connect The DotsMar27th, 20:38
The mistake is lumping India withthe East Asian Confucian Economies.
Japan, Taiwan, South Korea,Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan are high tech and high income modern economies.
China will eventually emulate andapproach the modernity, quality of life and wage parity of the 4 Tigers.
But China is bigger than all ofthem combined--and doubled.
India is a SubcontinentalIndo-Asian Economy.
India's peers are Pakistan, SriLanka, and Bangladesh.
Combined in population, theSubcontinent accounts for one-third of humanity.
More hunger than Africa.
More shortage of clean water andtoilets than Africa.
More poverty than Africa.
And receiving more NGO Aid thanAfrica.
In the Subcontinent, India is theleader of the pack.
But compared to the ConfucianAsian Economies, India is a distant laggard.
India is booming, no differentthan other neighbors of China that reciprocate trade with the booming Chineseeconomy. India is growing fast but at no better rates than South Korea, Taiwan,Singapore, Vietnam, Cambodia, Myanmar, Tibet and Russia.
And it is wrong and futile tocompare India to China.
They are both Asian but indifferent universes.
It is the difference betweenConfucianism and Hinduism.
文章的错误就在于将印度和东亚儒家圈的经济混为一谈了。
日本、台湾（地区）、韩国、新加坡、香港和台湾（地区，台湾重复了啊）拥有较高的技术水平和高收益的现代经济模式。中国最终会效仿并实现现代化，人民生活质量和工资待遇会和四小虎的水平相当。
但是中国（的经济规模）比它们所有加起来的两倍还大。
而印度则是印度次大陆的经济模式。
和印度同等层次的是巴基斯坦、斯里兰卡和孟加拉国。
印度次大陆的总人口是世界人口的1/3。
比非洲的饥饿人数多。
比非洲还更欠缺干净水和厕所。
比非洲贫穷。
接受的非政府援助比非洲还多。
在次大陆区域，印度算是领头羊。
但是和亚洲儒家圈相比，印度落后的太多了。
印度和中国的其他邻国一样，因为受到迅速增长的中国经济的提携而快速发展。印度的经济增速并不比韩国、台湾（地区）、新加坡、越南、柬埔寨、缅甸、XZ（地区）和俄罗斯快。
而把印度拿来和中国相比是错误的，也是毫无意义的。
他们同处亚洲但截然不同。
这就是儒学和印度教的区别。
DavidFrawleyinreply to Connect The DotsMar 27th, 20:50
All you did was conflate a lot ofissues with Hinduism. India is yet to become a Hindu nation with Hindu values.India has been denying its Hindu identity ever since that brown Englishman,Hindu-loathing Nehru become Prime Minister.
你过多地把所有问题推给了印度教。印度没有变成印度教价值观为主的印度教国家。从棕色皮肤讨厌印度教的英国人尼赫鲁成为总理以来，印度就已经否认了它身上的印度教标签。
MostJustWantPeaceinreply to DavidFrawleyMar 27th, 22:40
Is Nehru considered a "brownEnglishman" because of his trysts with Lord Mountbatten's wife?
是不是因为尼赫鲁和蒙巴顿公爵的夫人约会，所以就被认为是“棕色皮肤的英国人”？
RajaPoruinreply to Connect The DotsMar 27th, 23:45
.... and Confucianism is waysuperior, bro !
……儒学更高端，兄弟！
RajaPoruinreply to MostJustWantPeaceMar 27th, 23:49
Very clever ! Mountbatten's wifewas English. For a tryst, a discriminating person would not select anEnglishwoman, perfect though they may be in all other respects. Personally, anAmerican lady would be far better and more delightful and totally unforgettableor more lovable, but I digress. Nehru was just fine. One always emulates theculture of the conqueror. It's how life is. Get used to it.
真聪明！蒙巴顿的夫人是英国人。从约会的角度来说，一个明智的人是不会选择英国女人的，虽然她可能在其他方面都很优秀。我个人认为英国女人非常好而且讨人喜欢、令人难忘或者很可爱，哦我扯远了。尼赫鲁挺不错的，他努力去效仿征服者的文明。这就是生活，你要习惯它。
GodricGriffindorinreply to Connect The DotsMar 28th, 01:00
You seem to have a verysuperficial outlook towards India. I don't see how a country's peers arerelated to its development. So lets say Israel is in a parallel universe simplybecause its neighbors are socially backward Arab states.
你对印度的认识非常肤浅。我不明白一个国家的层次和它的发展水平有什么关系。如果要这么说的话，以色列就是在平行宇宙中（译注：非现实的），要知道它的邻国都是落后的阿拉伯国家。
Connect The Dotsinreply to GodricGriffindorMar 28th, 13:34
It is not simply peers...it isculture, religion, personal industry, education, use of capital, innovation andthe gene pool.
Arabs and Israelis agree they areday and night in ANY meaningful comparison.
Indians, Pakistani and SriLankans are one big gene pool and Hindustan culture. Less than one generationago they were one big united country in the Empire.
这不是简单的类比……它涉及到文化、宗教信仰、小工业、教育、资金利用、创新精神和遗传基因等方方面面。
阿拉伯和以色列都会认同无论从任何方面来对比，它们都处在不同层面。
印度、巴基斯坦和斯里兰卡的人种遗传基因是同源的，而且同处印度教文化圈。上一代人的时候它们还都在同一个帝国的统治之下呢。
AshishMar27th, 20:58
We need to improve DomesticInfrastructure first before We Bother with becoming a Great power!!!
What a Silly Article!
在想着成为强国之前，我们要先改善国内基础设施！！！
这狗屁文章！
DavidFrawleyMar27th, 21:11
The Economist is as condescendingas ever when it comes to India. It still imagines that it can dictate to 'itscolony'. This is the result of never really letting go of the 'crown jewel' ofthe British Empire which would not have amounted to much had the British notraped, looted, subjugated and practised genocide in India. But alas, it is an independentnation. The British rewrote history that was pure fiction and propaganda; itsought to deny the great history of the Hindu nation that gave the world muchof its civilisation, maths and science and its values.
By stating that India shares'western values' is akin to putting the cart before the horse; it is the westthat has taken on Indian-Hindu values. Modern Christianity, which is still awork in progress resembled more the Islam of today for at least a 1000 years.
India will become a state definedby Hinduism; which is the world's only truly universal ethos. The era ofdenying and trivialising Hindus is almost at an end. Congress Party of India ishindering India's and the world's material and spiritual growth.
一谈到印度经济学人就惺惺作态起来了。似乎还在对它的“殖民地”发号施令。这就是没有摘下大英帝国“王冠上的珠宝”的结果，似乎英国从来没有在印度强奸、劫掠、侵略和大规模屠杀似的。但是现在印度成了独立国家了，于是英国改写历史，一派胡言。它否认印度向世界输出文化、数学、科学和价值观的伟大历史。说什么印度拥有共同的“西方价值观”完全是颠倒黑白，其实是西方接受了印度教价值观。现代基督教文明更像是1000年前至今未变的伊斯兰文明。
印度会成为一个印度教国家，印度教文明是唯一的普世价值观。否认和平庸化印度教文明的时代结束了。印度国大党阻碍了印度和全世界的物质和精神的进步发展。
Curate's Egginreply to DavidFrawleyMar 27th, 23:24
Relax, my religious extremistpal, the Economist is a newspaper, and therefore it can write about any countryanywhere in the world.
Your logic would have you forbida German newspaper saying ANYTHING about Israel. Not much of a logic, is it?
放松点，宗教偏执狂。经济学人是新闻媒体，所以它们想写哪个国家就写哪个国家。
按照你的逻辑，德国的媒体就不能对以色列做出任何评价。这不科学是吧？
RajaPoruinreply to DavidFrawleyMar 27th, 23:44
Hinduism is just the Taliban witha darker skin, except for the very superior Brahmins who look like Albanians.
印度教就是黑皮肤的塔利班，除了上层人士之外，他们看着像阿尔巴尼亚人。
AussieLouisinreply to DavidFrawleyMar 28th, 05:07
"This is the result of neverreally letting go of the 'crown jewel' of the British Empire which would nothave amounted to much had the British not raped, looted, subjugated andpractised genocide in India."
Truth be told, the treasures ofBritain are mostly Indian treasures, stolen whilst they were doing the above.They stole largely too from China and the Chinese are now devising ways to getsome of their British-looted treasures back. This is getting the Britishworried and thus their prayers and hopes that China would never be powerfulenough to demand it! Thus their incessant and obsessive fault-finding withChina's remarkable economic development and anything Chinese, as observable bythe typically anti-Chinese tenor of this article.
It always puzzled me why theIndians never thought of wanting their treasures back. Even the little Greeknation wants back the so-called Elgin marble, pieces of rock writing importantto Greek historical heritage, shamelessly taken back to Britain by a typicalkleptomaniac Britisher whom they elevated to a Lord; my word!
Perhaps, there's somethinglacking in Indian pride when looking up at their past masters?
说实话，英国的大部分财产都是它在印度干那些坏事的时候劫来的。他们在中国也抢了不少，现在中国人正想法设法要回这些赃物。这让英国人很紧张，所以他们就祈祷并希望中国永远不要强大到能够索回赃物的时候！因此他们没完没了地在中国令人瞩目的经济成就和任何事情上挑刺，比如很明显地在这篇文章中的反中论调。
我一直有一个疑问，为什么印度不要回他们的珍宝呢？就连小国希腊都要求英国归还埃尔金大理石雕像，一块希腊重要历史遗产的小石块，一个被他们选为国王的英国盗窃狂可耻地从希腊夺走带回到英国，苍天呐！
或许在面对前主人时，印度人少了点自尊心？
MostJustWantPeaceinreply to AussieLouisMar 28th, 06:03
I think the first treasure Chinashould demand back are the collection of texts form the Mogao Caves inDunhuang. This collection includes a Chinese translation of the Diamond Sutra,the oldest surviving printed book in the world!
我觉得中国要求英国归还的第一件珍宝就是敦煌莫高窟出土的书册。这些书册中包括《金刚经》的汉译本，全世界最早的印刷版图书！
biswajitroyinreply to AussieLouisMar 28th, 13:30
For an estimate, British empirehad generated revenue from India to the tune of 8 trillion us dollars adjustedfor inflation over 200 years rule.
据估算，大英帝国在200年的统治时期内，从印度掠走的财产根据通货膨胀系数修正后达到8万亿美元。
biswajitroyinreply to MostJustWantPeaceMar 28th, 13:31
diamond sutra interesting, is itrelated to the kama sutra?
《金刚经》，很有意思，和《性爱宝典》有什么联系吗？
http://www.ltaaa.com/wtfy/8216.html
没人怀疑中国已经跻身世界强国之列：中美国的G2设想早已被谈及，虽然时机尚未完全成熟。印度因其10+亿的人口、经济发展前景、贸易伙伴的价值和不断增长的军事实力，经常被人拿来和中国相提并论。虽然还有些太情愿，但联合国安理会5个常任理事国也都支持印度入常。中国的崛起已经是不争的事实，而印度通常被看做步调不能协调一致的准强国。
*
That is a pity, for as a great power, India would have much tooffer. Although poorer and less economically dynamic than China, India has softpower in abundance. It is committed to democratic institutions, the rule of lawand human rights. As a victim of jihadist violence, it is in the front rank ofthe fight against terrorism. It has a huge and talented diaspora. It may notwant to be co-opted by the West but it shares many Western values. It isconfident and culturally rich. If it had a permanent Security Council seat(which it has earned by being one of the most consistent contributors to UNpeacekeeping operations) it would not instinctively excuse and defend brutalregimes. Unlike China and Russia, it has few skeletons in its cupboard. Withits enormous coastline and respected navy (rated by its American counterpart,with which it often holds exercises, as up to NATO standard) India iswell-placed to provide security in a critical part of the global commons.
这是印度的悲哀，作为一个大国印度本可以有更大的作为。虽然和中国相比，印度较为贫穷且缺乏经济活力，但印度的软实力更加强大。它致力于改善民主法治和人权。作为圣战活动的受害国，它处在反恐的前沿。它有数量众多才干突出的海外人才。它并不愿意被西方同化，但它的很多价值观和西方的相同。它有丰富的文化传统且充满自信。如果它能成为安理会常任理事国的话（作为联合国维和行动的最积极参与者之一），它本能地不会庇护残暴的政权或者为他们开脱。和中国或者俄罗斯不同，它没有什么见不得人的丑事。凭借着漫长的海岸线和实力不俗的海军（据经常和它一起举行军演的美国评价，已经达到北约标准），印度拥有绝佳的地理位置，可以为世界运输的关键航道提供安全保证。
（备注）联合国维和行动相关情况：
十大主要兵力提供国如下：巴基斯坦（10,173）、孟加拉（9,675）、印度（9,471）、尼泊尔（3,626）、约旦（3,564）、乌拉圭（2,583）、意大利（2,539）、加纳、尼日利亚和法国。
至2008年4月止，100国共有2,468人的兵力在维和过程中死亡，前三如下：印度（127）、加拿大（114）和加纳（113）。
Themodest power
YetIndia’s huge potential to be a force for stability and an upholder of therules-based international system is far from being realised. One big reason isthat the country lacks the culture to pursue an active security policy. Despitea rapidly rising defence budget, forecast to be the world’s fourth-largest by2020, India’s politicians and bureaucrats show little interest in grandstrategy. The foreign service is ridiculously feeble—India’s 1.2 billion peopleare represented by about the same number of diplomats as Singapore’s 5m. Theleadership of the armed forces and the political-bureaucratic establishmentoperate in different worlds. The defence ministry is chronically short ofmilitary expertise.
These weaknesses partly reflect a pragmatic desire to makeeconomic development at home the priority. India has also wisely kept generalsout of politics (a lesson ignored elsewhere in Asia, not least by Pakistan,with usually parlous results). But Nehruvian ideology also plays a role. Athome, India mercifully gave up Fabian economics in the 1990s (and reaped therewards). But diplomatically, 66 years after the British left, it still clingsto the post-independence creeds of semi-pacifism and “non-alignment”: the Westis not to be trusted.
India’s tradition of strategic restraint has in some ways servedthe country well. Having little to show for several limited wars with Pakistanand one with China, India tends to respond to provocations with caution. It haslong-running territorial disputes with both its big neighbours, but it usuallytries not to inflame them (although it censors any maps which accurately depictwhere the border lies, something its press shamefully tolerates). India doesnot go looking for trouble, and that has generally been to its advantage.
谦逊的大国
然而，印度成为世界稳定和国际秩序维护者的巨大潜能还远没有变成现实。一个很大的原因就是印度缺乏推行积极安全政策的文化。虽然印度军费在快速增长，预计到2020年将成为世界第四大军费支出大国，但印度的政治家和整体官僚机构对宏观战略缺乏兴趣。外事服务部门更是小得可怜，作为一个拥有12亿人口的大国，其外交人员的数量竟然和只有500万人口的新加坡差不多。印度武装部队和政治官僚机构的运作机制截然不同。国防部长一直都是军事技能不足的人员担任。
这或多或少反映了印度将发展国内经济作为优先考虑的实用主义想法。印度同样很明智地要求军人不得干政（在亚洲地区这点被忽略，在巴基斯坦这常常造成局势动荡）。但尼赫鲁主义仍然在发挥作用。在国内问题上，印度上世纪90年代明智地放弃了费边主义经济学并取得了成果；而在外交事务上，虽然已从英国独立出来66年了，但它仍然固守和平主义和不结盟主义的信条：西方不可信。
(译注：费边主义的主张是社会主义，其手段则为渐进主义。)
印度的战略克制传统理念对国家起到了一些良好的作用。在与巴基斯坦的几场战争和中国的一次战争中，印度都倾向于用克制来面对挑衅。印度和这两个大的邻国的领土纠纷由来已久，但它一直都试图不去挑起他们的怒火（不过它对任何清晰标明边界的地图进行审核，而这点它们的出版社居然可耻地接受了）。印度看起来不像是个麻烦制造者，这点也对它有利
评论巨多，按照时间顺序翻译了部分：
Will@MoorMar27th, 16:24
It is wishful thinking that Indiawould be a great power with a clear strategy about future, yet still doesnothing against the will of the West.
Maybe latter than China, Indiawould start to give the West some headache, although not necessarily directconflict. And it has not THAT much to do about being democracy or not.
Once a powerful country forged,you'd learn to deal with it. And it will not be easy.
This article is so much easily tobe summarized: Oh man, we hope that we could switch India and China! PuttingIndia in the big five in UN, etc. But in that case, maybe India will be moreassertive and more demanding. And U.S. will always want to tackle the secondpower.
对未来拥有明确战略的印度会成为一个强国，而且还不会和西方的想法相悖，这真是一个美好的愿望。
可能比中国晚点，但印度会开始让西方感到头疼的，即便不一定是正面冲突。这可和民主与否没多大关系。
一旦一个强国开始崛起，你就必须学会如何和它共处，而这并不容易。
这篇文章用人话来说就是：我们希望把印度和中国对调一下！把印度拉进5大常委的席位等等。不过那样一来的话，或许印度会变得更加自信和要求更多。然后美国又要习惯性地遏制老二了。
GOTTMITUNS✠1870inreply to Will@MoorMar 27th, 17:14
It's also interesting to notethat in the eraly 80's, people said that Japan would become a superpowerbecause of population growth and technological advantages, and also said itwould overtake the USA as largest economy in 2000.
The bubble bursted and now Japanhas a declining population and deflation.
China and India are actually toolarge. I do not doubt that they have the power to manage their issues, but theyare culturally and socially divided - especially India. The EU looks like auniculturalist bloc with only a small gap between rich and poor in comparison.
Earth was hardly able to feed onebillion people in the West. I doubt we can offer two, three, seven billionpeople the living standards they want. What glues societies like China andIndia together is the hope that the tomorrow will be better than the present,and that all people will end up in those impressive skyscrapers at the Chinesecoast.
When they realize that thiscannot happen, it will be the source of disturbance. People will just call forsocialism like they did in the West.
有个很有趣的事实：上世纪80年代早期，因为日本的人口增长和技术优势，大家都说它会成为超级大国，还说它会在2000年赶上最大经济体美国。
泡沫破裂之后，现在的日本面临人口减少和经济通缩问题。
中国和印度太大了。我不怀疑它们解决自身事务的能力，但是它们面临文化和社会割裂的问题——尤其是印度。欧盟则在文化上是统一的，只不过在贫富之间存在差距而已。
地球的资源负担西方的10亿人口已经非常吃力了，我想我们没有能力让20、30甚至70亿人口都过上他们想要的生活。让中国和印度社会凝聚起来的动力是未来会比现在更好的希望，他们认为都能在中国海边的令人瞩目的高楼大厦里生活。
一旦他们意识到这个希望无法实现的时候，动荡就可能发生。他们会像现在西方社会的人那样要求实行社会主义。
k_canadainreply to Will@MoorMar 27th, 19:29
Good points.
说得好。
discovery1Mar27th, 17:37
I just want to say that I reallylike the picture that goes with this article.
我只想说我很喜欢文章的配图。
Will@MoorMar27th, 17:49
"Most of all, though, Indianeeds to give up its outdated philosophy of non-alignment. "
I think the non-alignment shouldbe the policy of all powers, including US, China and India. Alignment has beenone of the biggest reasons that has pushed the world into WWI and WWII.
“最重要的是印度应该抛弃过时的不结盟理念”。我认为不结盟理念应该是包括美国、中国和印度在内的所有大国的政策。国家联盟是导致第一、二次世界大战的最大原因之一。
Joshua TreeMar27th, 17:53
I find it difficult to fathom acountry as a "great power" with supra-regional ambitions which looksso poorly after its own people as India does.
像印度这样超越所在地区的野心但国内民众如此可怜的所谓“强国”，真是让人难以理解。
Zaphod_KMar27th, 18:03
Maybe India could instead try tobe an example for the rest of the world with its philosophy of non-alignment,non-violence, and not "looking for trouble" (as the author puts it).Maybe the Indian political elite is more strategic than the author gives themcredit for - they have observed what has occurred in their neighboringcountries by "strategically aligning" with the West (read Pakistan,Afghanistan), and want to steer clear of playing puppet and focus onself-development, without needing to play second to anyone in the long-run. Itsa sensible strategy.
或许印度可以给外界做一个不结盟、非暴力、非“麻烦制造者”（如作者所说）的表率。或许印度政治精英比作者评价的更加高瞻远瞩——他们对和西方“战略结盟”的邻国所发生的情况非常清楚，他们想要避免被操控而专注于自身发展，不用长期扮演老二角色。这是明智的战略。
k_canadainreply to Zaphod_KMar 27th, 18:47
Well said Zaphod_K
说得好。
k_canadaMar27th, 18:58
I agree with both @skepticji and@Zaphod_K's observations on India. I would like to add to these points bysaying that there are two avenues that India should aggressively pursue (alongwith the whole raft of other things that they need to focus on) that will helpits long-term strategic objectives.
The first is self-reliance in thearea of energy. Given its geographic location and its natural strengths(tropical climate, biodiversity), India has a golden opportunity to become aleader in energy innovation (particularly in the area of green energy). Thiswill allow for reduced dependence on the imports of oil and will strengthenIndia's hand vis a vis its neighbours and the West.
The second area would beinvestment in the navy. I think it's critical that India focus on strengtheningits navy to ensure a strong presence in the Indian Ocean.
我赞同楼上两位对印度的观点。但我想补充说说印度应该努力做到的两点（和其它他们需要全力以赴的一样），这将有助于他们实现长期战略。
第一就是能源自给。鉴于印度的地理位置和自身自然环境（热带气候、丰富的自然多样性），印度有绝佳机会成为能源革命的领头羊（尤其是在绿色能源领域）。这能让印度减少对进口石油的依赖，并增强它和邻国及西方抗衡的能力。第二就是加大海军投入。我想印度加大海军投入以确保其在印度洋的强大存在是至关重要的。
In the long runMar27th, 19:11
What a dumb article. Indians needto spend billions on defense like they need a hole in the head.
India has a multitude of problemsinternally. We're not even talking about education or jobs, this is a countrythat cannot even provide clean toilets, reliable energy or clean drinking wateror basic infrastructure for 80% of its population. Such a country has nobusiness trying to be a world superpower. And only a country that is stupidbeyond believe or suicidal would want to invade a poverty stricken hell holelike India, with no natural resources to speak of and a billion hungry people.While I wouldn't put it pass the US or any NATO country to make such a dumbmove, the Chinese are a lot smarter.
This article is nothing more thana sales pitch for the US defense industry. If Indians have any brain they'd dowell to ignore it and go about what they do everyday, which is trying to makelife better for themselves and their family. Forget trying to be a tool forwestern powers.
什么垃圾文章。印度在国防上投入数十亿纯粹是脑子进水了。
印度有很多的国内问题。别说什么教育或者就业问题了，他们80%的人口连干净的厕所、可靠的能源、干净的饮用水和基础设施都没有。这样的国家别想做什么世界超级大国。而且除非是疯了或者是想自杀，否则没有国家想要侵略毫无自然资源可言且有着10亿饥饿人口的见鬼的穷国印度。我不相信美国或者任何北约国家会采取这么愚蠢的行动，中国则聪明得多了不用提了。
这篇文章纯粹是美国的军工产业推销软文。印度人只要稍有点脑子的话，就应该不搭理这文章然后正常干每天干的事情，为自己和国家更好的未来努力。别成为西方强国的工具。
RajaPoruinreply to In the long runMar 27th, 23:55
Bingo ! Dead on ！！
说的太对了！
AussieLouisinreply to In the long runMar 28th, 05:24
Perhaps the author of thisarticle, if he truly cares about Indians, could persuade Britain to return someof the much needed treasures it stole from India.
If nothing else, it would help tokeep some of the toilets clean, so more tourists could come and gawd!
如果这篇文章的作者真的关心印度的话，他应该说服英国归还从印度偷走的金银财宝。
不出什么以外的话，这有助于他们保持厕所的整洁，这样一来会有更多的观光客。
HeSaidWhat...inreply to AussieLouisMar 28th, 06:48
Agreed. The British can start withreturning the crown jewel to India. Greek statues to Greece... These countriesneed them a lot more than Westminster.
是的，英国应该先把女王皇冠上的钻石还给印度，把希腊的雕像还给希腊……他们比白金汉宫更需要这些珍宝。
VodkaredbullMar27th, 20:26
The future of the world will liein the realm of multilateralism and non-alignment. India, more than any othercountry understands this. The writer should rather understand that alignmentand the whole idea of being a superpower, is instead "obsolete."
世界的未来会是多极和不结盟的，印度比其他任何国家都更了解这点。作者应该明白结盟和成为超级大国的理念是落伍的。
RajaPoruinreply to VodkaredbullMar 27th, 23:51
Wow ! Let me sell you someswampland !
天那！你这个傻瓜！
Connect The DotsMar27th, 20:38
The mistake is lumping India withthe East Asian Confucian Economies.
Japan, Taiwan, South Korea,Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan are high tech and high income modern economies.
China will eventually emulate andapproach the modernity, quality of life and wage parity of the 4 Tigers.
But China is bigger than all ofthem combined--and doubled.
India is a SubcontinentalIndo-Asian Economy.
India's peers are Pakistan, SriLanka, and Bangladesh.
Combined in population, theSubcontinent accounts for one-third of humanity.
More hunger than Africa.
More shortage of clean water andtoilets than Africa.
More poverty than Africa.
And receiving more NGO Aid thanAfrica.
In the Subcontinent, India is theleader of the pack.
But compared to the ConfucianAsian Economies, India is a distant laggard.
India is booming, no differentthan other neighbors of China that reciprocate trade with the booming Chineseeconomy. India is growing fast but at no better rates than South Korea, Taiwan,Singapore, Vietnam, Cambodia, Myanmar, Tibet and Russia.
And it is wrong and futile tocompare India to China.
They are both Asian but indifferent universes.
It is the difference betweenConfucianism and Hinduism.
文章的错误就在于将印度和东亚儒家圈的经济混为一谈了。
日本、台湾（地区）、韩国、新加坡、香港和台湾（地区，台湾重复了啊）拥有较高的技术水平和高收益的现代经济模式。中国最终会效仿并实现现代化，人民生活质量和工资待遇会和四小虎的水平相当。
但是中国（的经济规模）比它们所有加起来的两倍还大。
而印度则是印度次大陆的经济模式。
和印度同等层次的是巴基斯坦、斯里兰卡和孟加拉国。
印度次大陆的总人口是世界人口的1/3。
比非洲的饥饿人数多。
比非洲还更欠缺干净水和厕所。
比非洲贫穷。
接受的非政府援助比非洲还多。
在次大陆区域，印度算是领头羊。
但是和亚洲儒家圈相比，印度落后的太多了。
印度和中国的其他邻国一样，因为受到迅速增长的中国经济的提携而快速发展。印度的经济增速并不比韩国、台湾（地区）、新加坡、越南、柬埔寨、缅甸、XZ（地区）和俄罗斯快。
而把印度拿来和中国相比是错误的，也是毫无意义的。
他们同处亚洲但截然不同。
这就是儒学和印度教的区别。
DavidFrawleyinreply to Connect The DotsMar 27th, 20:50
All you did was conflate a lot ofissues with Hinduism. India is yet to become a Hindu nation with Hindu values.India has been denying its Hindu identity ever since that brown Englishman,Hindu-loathing Nehru become Prime Minister.
你过多地把所有问题推给了印度教。印度没有变成印度教价值观为主的印度教国家。从棕色皮肤讨厌印度教的英国人尼赫鲁成为总理以来，印度就已经否认了它身上的印度教标签。
MostJustWantPeaceinreply to DavidFrawleyMar 27th, 22:40
Is Nehru considered a "brownEnglishman" because of his trysts with Lord Mountbatten's wife?
是不是因为尼赫鲁和蒙巴顿公爵的夫人约会，所以就被认为是“棕色皮肤的英国人”？
RajaPoruinreply to Connect The DotsMar 27th, 23:45
.... and Confucianism is waysuperior, bro !
……儒学更高端，兄弟！
RajaPoruinreply to MostJustWantPeaceMar 27th, 23:49
Very clever ! Mountbatten's wifewas English. For a tryst, a discriminating person would not select anEnglishwoman, perfect though they may be in all other respects. Personally, anAmerican lady would be far better and more delightful and totally unforgettableor more lovable, but I digress. Nehru was just fine. One always emulates theculture of the conqueror. It's how life is. Get used to it.
真聪明！蒙巴顿的夫人是英国人。从约会的角度来说，一个明智的人是不会选择英国女人的，虽然她可能在其他方面都很优秀。我个人认为英国女人非常好而且讨人喜欢、令人难忘或者很可爱，哦我扯远了。尼赫鲁挺不错的，他努力去效仿征服者的文明。这就是生活，你要习惯它。
GodricGriffindorinreply to Connect The DotsMar 28th, 01:00
You seem to have a verysuperficial outlook towards India. I don't see how a country's peers arerelated to its development. So lets say Israel is in a parallel universe simplybecause its neighbors are socially backward Arab states.
你对印度的认识非常肤浅。我不明白一个国家的层次和它的发展水平有什么关系。如果要这么说的话，以色列就是在平行宇宙中（译注：非现实的），要知道它的邻国都是落后的阿拉伯国家。
Connect The Dotsinreply to GodricGriffindorMar 28th, 13:34
It is not simply peers...it isculture, religion, personal industry, education, use of capital, innovation andthe gene pool.
Arabs and Israelis agree they areday and night in ANY meaningful comparison.
Indians, Pakistani and SriLankans are one big gene pool and Hindustan culture. Less than one generationago they were one big united country in the Empire.
这不是简单的类比……它涉及到文化、宗教信仰、小工业、教育、资金利用、创新精神和遗传基因等方方面面。
阿拉伯和以色列都会认同无论从任何方面来对比，它们都处在不同层面。
印度、巴基斯坦和斯里兰卡的人种遗传基因是同源的，而且同处印度教文化圈。上一代人的时候它们还都在同一个帝国的统治之下呢。
AshishMar27th, 20:58
We need to improve DomesticInfrastructure first before We Bother with becoming a Great power!!!
What a Silly Article!
在想着成为强国之前，我们要先改善国内基础设施！！！
这狗屁文章！
DavidFrawleyMar27th, 21:11
The Economist is as condescendingas ever when it comes to India. It still imagines that it can dictate to 'itscolony'. This is the result of never really letting go of the 'crown jewel' ofthe British Empire which would not have amounted to much had the British notraped, looted, subjugated and practised genocide in India. But alas, it is an independentnation. The British rewrote history that was pure fiction and propaganda; itsought to deny the great history of the Hindu nation that gave the world muchof its civilisation, maths and science and its values.
By stating that India shares'western values' is akin to putting the cart before the horse; it is the westthat has taken on Indian-Hindu values. Modern Christianity, which is still awork in progress resembled more the Islam of today for at least a 1000 years.
India will become a state definedby Hinduism; which is the world's only truly universal ethos. The era ofdenying and trivialising Hindus is almost at an end. Congress Party of India ishindering India's and the world's material and spiritual growth.
一谈到印度经济学人就惺惺作态起来了。似乎还在对它的“殖民地”发号施令。这就是没有摘下大英帝国“王冠上的珠宝”的结果，似乎英国从来没有在印度强奸、劫掠、侵略和大规模屠杀似的。但是现在印度成了独立国家了，于是英国改写历史，一派胡言。它否认印度向世界输出文化、数学、科学和价值观的伟大历史。说什么印度拥有共同的“西方价值观”完全是颠倒黑白，其实是西方接受了印度教价值观。现代基督教文明更像是1000年前至今未变的伊斯兰文明。
印度会成为一个印度教国家，印度教文明是唯一的普世价值观。否认和平庸化印度教文明的时代结束了。印度国大党阻碍了印度和全世界的物质和精神的进步发展。
Curate's Egginreply to DavidFrawleyMar 27th, 23:24
Relax, my religious extremistpal, the Economist is a newspaper, and therefore it can write about any countryanywhere in the world.
Your logic would have you forbida German newspaper saying ANYTHING about Israel. Not much of a logic, is it?
放松点，宗教偏执狂。经济学人是新闻媒体，所以它们想写哪个国家就写哪个国家。
按照你的逻辑，德国的媒体就不能对以色列做出任何评价。这不科学是吧？
RajaPoruinreply to DavidFrawleyMar 27th, 23:44
Hinduism is just the Taliban witha darker skin, except for the very superior Brahmins who look like Albanians.
印度教就是黑皮肤的塔利班，除了上层人士之外，他们看着像阿尔巴尼亚人。
AussieLouisinreply to DavidFrawleyMar 28th, 05:07
"This is the result of neverreally letting go of the 'crown jewel' of the British Empire which would nothave amounted to much had the British not raped, looted, subjugated andpractised genocide in India."
Truth be told, the treasures ofBritain are mostly Indian treasures, stolen whilst they were doing the above.They stole largely too from China and the Chinese are now devising ways to getsome of their British-looted treasures back. This is getting the Britishworried and thus their prayers and hopes that China would never be powerfulenough to demand it! Thus their incessant and obsessive fault-finding withChina's remarkable economic development and anything Chinese, as observable bythe typically anti-Chinese tenor of this article.
It always puzzled me why theIndians never thought of wanting their treasures back. Even the little Greeknation wants back the so-called Elgin marble, pieces of rock writing importantto Greek historical heritage, shamelessly taken back to Britain by a typicalkleptomaniac Britisher whom they elevated to a Lord; my word!
Perhaps, there's somethinglacking in Indian pride when looking up at their past masters?
说实话，英国的大部分财产都是它在印度干那些坏事的时候劫来的。他们在中国也抢了不少，现在中国人正想法设法要回这些赃物。这让英国人很紧张，所以他们就祈祷并希望中国永远不要强大到能够索回赃物的时候！因此他们没完没了地在中国令人瞩目的经济成就和任何事情上挑刺，比如很明显地在这篇文章中的反中论调。
我一直有一个疑问，为什么印度不要回他们的珍宝呢？就连小国希腊都要求英国归还埃尔金大理石雕像，一块希腊重要历史遗产的小石块，一个被他们选为国王的英国盗窃狂可耻地从希腊夺走带回到英国，苍天呐！
或许在面对前主人时，印度人少了点自尊心？
MostJustWantPeaceinreply to AussieLouisMar 28th, 06:03
I think the first treasure Chinashould demand back are the collection of texts form the Mogao Caves inDunhuang. This collection includes a Chinese translation of the Diamond Sutra,the oldest surviving printed book in the world!
我觉得中国要求英国归还的第一件珍宝就是敦煌莫高窟出土的书册。这些书册中包括《金刚经》的汉译本，全世界最早的印刷版图书！
biswajitroyinreply to AussieLouisMar 28th, 13:30
For an estimate, British empirehad generated revenue from India to the tune of 8 trillion us dollars adjustedfor inflation over 200 years rule.
据估算，大英帝国在200年的统治时期内，从印度掠走的财产根据通货膨胀系数修正后达到8万亿美元。
biswajitroyinreply to MostJustWantPeaceMar 28th, 13:31
diamond sutra interesting, is itrelated to the kama sutra?
《金刚经》，很有意思，和《性爱宝典》有什么联系吗？
http://www.ltaaa.com/wtfy/8216.html
Nobody doubts that China has joined the ranks of the greatpowers: the idea of a G2 with America is mooted, albeit prematurely. India isoften spoken of in the same breath as China because of its billion-pluspopulation, economic promise, value as a trading partner and growing militarycapabilities. All five permanent members of the United Nations Security Councilsupport—however grudgingly—India’s claim to join them. But whereas China’s riseis a given, India is still widely seen as a nearly-power that cannot quite getits act together.
没人怀疑中国已经跻身世界强国之列：中美国的G2设想早已被谈及，虽然时机尚未完全成熟。印度因其10+亿的人口、经济发展前景、贸易伙伴的价值和不断增长的军事实力，经常被人拿来和中国相提并论。虽然还有些太情愿，但联合国安理会5个常任理事国也都支持印度入常。中国的崛起已经是不争的事实，而印度通常被看做步调不能协调一致的准强国。
*
That is a pity, for as a great power, India would have much tooffer. Although poorer and less economically dynamic than China, India has softpower in abundance. It is committed to democratic institutions, the rule of lawand human rights. As a victim of jihadist violence, it is in the front rank ofthe fight against terrorism. It has a huge and talented diaspora. It may notwant to be co-opted by the West but it shares many Western values. It isconfident and culturally rich. If it had a permanent Security Council seat(which it has earned by being one of the most consistent contributors to UNpeacekeeping operations) it would not instinctively excuse and defend brutalregimes. Unlike China and Russia, it has few skeletons in its cupboard. Withits enormous coastline and respected navy (rated by its American counterpart,with which it often holds exercises, as up to NATO standard) India iswell-placed to provide security in a critical part of the global commons.
这是印度的悲哀，作为一个大国印度本可以有更大的作为。虽然和中国相比，印度较为贫穷且缺乏经济活力，但印度的软实力更加强大。它致力于改善民主法治和人权。作为圣战活动的受害国，它处在反恐的前沿。它有数量众多才干突出的海外人才。它并不愿意被西方同化，但它的很多价值观和西方的相同。它有丰富的文化传统且充满自信。如果它能成为安理会常任理事国的话（作为联合国维和行动的最积极参与者之一），它本能地不会庇护残暴的政权或者为他们开脱。和中国或者俄罗斯不同，它没有什么见不得人的丑事。凭借着漫长的海岸线和实力不俗的海军（据经常和它一起举行军演的美国评价，已经达到北约标准），印度拥有绝佳的地理位置，可以为世界运输的关键航道提供安全保证。
（备注）联合国维和行动相关情况：
十大主要兵力提供国如下：巴基斯坦（10,173）、孟加拉（9,675）、印度（9,471）、尼泊尔（3,626）、约旦（3,564）、乌拉圭（2,583）、意大利（2,539）、加纳、尼日利亚和法国。
至2008年4月止，100国共有2,468人的兵力在维和过程中死亡，前三如下：印度（127）、加拿大（114）和加纳（113）。
Themodest power
YetIndia’s huge potential to be a force for stability and an upholder of therules-based international system is far from being realised. One big reason isthat the country lacks the culture to pursue an active security policy. Despitea rapidly rising defence budget, forecast to be the world’s fourth-largest by2020, India’s politicians and bureaucrats show little interest in grandstrategy. The foreign service is ridiculously feeble—India’s 1.2 billion peopleare represented by about the same number of diplomats as Singapore’s 5m. Theleadership of the armed forces and the political-bureaucratic establishmentoperate in different worlds. The defence ministry is chronically short ofmilitary expertise.
These weaknesses partly reflect a pragmatic desire to makeeconomic development at home the priority. India has also wisely kept generalsout of politics (a lesson ignored elsewhere in Asia, not least by Pakistan,with usually parlous results). But Nehruvian ideology also plays a role. Athome, India mercifully gave up Fabian economics in the 1990s (and reaped therewards). But diplomatically, 66 years after the British left, it still clingsto the post-independence creeds of semi-pacifism and “non-alignment”: the Westis not to be trusted.
India’s tradition of strategic restraint has in some ways servedthe country well. Having little to show for several limited wars with Pakistanand one with China, India tends to respond to provocations with caution. It haslong-running territorial disputes with both its big neighbours, but it usuallytries not to inflame them (although it censors any maps which accurately depictwhere the border lies, something its press shamefully tolerates). India doesnot go looking for trouble, and that has generally been to its advantage.
谦逊的大国
然而，印度成为世界稳定和国际秩序维护者的巨大潜能还远没有变成现实。一个很大的原因就是印度缺乏推行积极安全政策的文化。虽然印度军费在快速增长，预计到2020年将成为世界第四大军费支出大国，但印度的政治家和整体官僚机构对宏观战略缺乏兴趣。外事服务部门更是小得可怜，作为一个拥有12亿人口的大国，其外交人员的数量竟然和只有500万人口的新加坡差不多。印度武装部队和政治官僚机构的运作机制截然不同。国防部长一直都是军事技能不足的人员担任。
这或多或少反映了印度将发展国内经济作为优先考虑的实用主义想法。印度同样很明智地要求军人不得干政（在亚洲地区这点被忽略，在巴基斯坦这常常造成局势动荡）。但尼赫鲁主义仍然在发挥作用。在国内问题上，印度上世纪90年代明智地放弃了费边主义经济学并取得了成果；而在外交事务上，虽然已从英国独立出来66年了，但它仍然固守和平主义和不结盟主义的信条：西方不可信。
(译注：费边主义的主张是社会主义，其手段则为渐进主义。)
印度的战略克制传统理念对国家起到了一些良好的作用。在与巴基斯坦的几场战争和中国的一次战争中，印度都倾向于用克制来面对挑衅。印度和这两个大的邻国的领土纠纷由来已久，但它一直都试图不去挑起他们的怒火（不过它对任何清晰标明边界的地图进行审核，而这点它们的出版社居然可耻地接受了）。印度看起来不像是个麻烦制造者，这点也对它有利
评论巨多，按照时间顺序翻译了部分：
Will@MoorMar27th, 16:24
It is wishful thinking that Indiawould be a great power with a clear strategy about future, yet still doesnothing against the will of the West.
Maybe latter than China, Indiawould start to give the West some headache, although not necessarily directconflict. And it has not THAT much to do about being democracy or not.
Once a powerful country forged,you'd learn to deal with it. And it will not be easy.
This article is so much easily tobe summarized: Oh man, we hope that we could switch India and China! PuttingIndia in the big five in UN, etc. But in that case, maybe India will be moreassertive and more demanding. And U.S. will always want to tackle the secondpower.
对未来拥有明确战略的印度会成为一个强国，而且还不会和西方的想法相悖，这真是一个美好的愿望。
可能比中国晚点，但印度会开始让西方感到头疼的，即便不一定是正面冲突。这可和民主与否没多大关系。
一旦一个强国开始崛起，你就必须学会如何和它共处，而这并不容易。
这篇文章用人话来说就是：我们希望把印度和中国对调一下！把印度拉进5大常委的席位等等。不过那样一来的话，或许印度会变得更加自信和要求更多。然后美国又要习惯性地遏制老二了。
GOTTMITUNS✠1870inreply to Will@MoorMar 27th, 17:14
It's also interesting to notethat in the eraly 80's, people said that Japan would become a superpowerbecause of population growth and technological advantages, and also said itwould overtake the USA as largest economy in 2000.
The bubble bursted and now Japanhas a declining population and deflation.
China and India are actually toolarge. I do not doubt that they have the power to manage their issues, but theyare culturally and socially divided - especially India. The EU looks like auniculturalist bloc with only a small gap between rich and poor in comparison.
Earth was hardly able to feed onebillion people in the West. I doubt we can offer two, three, seven billionpeople the living standards they want. What glues societies like China andIndia together is the hope that the tomorrow will be better than the present,and that all people will end up in those impressive skyscrapers at the Chinesecoast.
When they realize that thiscannot happen, it will be the source of disturbance. People will just call forsocialism like they did in the West.
有个很有趣的事实：上世纪80年代早期，因为日本的人口增长和技术优势，大家都说它会成为超级大国，还说它会在2000年赶上最大经济体美国。
泡沫破裂之后，现在的日本面临人口减少和经济通缩问题。
中国和印度太大了。我不怀疑它们解决自身事务的能力，但是它们面临文化和社会割裂的问题——尤其是印度。欧盟则在文化上是统一的，只不过在贫富之间存在差距而已。
地球的资源负担西方的10亿人口已经非常吃力了，我想我们没有能力让20、30甚至70亿人口都过上他们想要的生活。让中国和印度社会凝聚起来的动力是未来会比现在更好的希望，他们认为都能在中国海边的令人瞩目的高楼大厦里生活。
一旦他们意识到这个希望无法实现的时候，动荡就可能发生。他们会像现在西方社会的人那样要求实行社会主义。
k_canadainreply to Will@MoorMar 27th, 19:29
Good points.
说得好。
discovery1Mar27th, 17:37
I just want to say that I reallylike the picture that goes with this article.
我只想说我很喜欢文章的配图。
Will@MoorMar27th, 17:49
"Most of all, though, Indianeeds to give up its outdated philosophy of non-alignment. "
I think the non-alignment shouldbe the policy of all powers, including US, China and India. Alignment has beenone of the biggest reasons that has pushed the world into WWI and WWII.
“最重要的是印度应该抛弃过时的不结盟理念”。我认为不结盟理念应该是包括美国、中国和印度在内的所有大国的政策。国家联盟是导致第一、二次世界大战的最大原因之一。
Joshua TreeMar27th, 17:53
I find it difficult to fathom acountry as a "great power" with supra-regional ambitions which looksso poorly after its own people as India does.
像印度这样超越所在地区的野心但国内民众如此可怜的所谓“强国”，真是让人难以理解。
Zaphod_KMar27th, 18:03
Maybe India could instead try tobe an example for the rest of the world with its philosophy of non-alignment,non-violence, and not "looking for trouble" (as the author puts it).Maybe the Indian political elite is more strategic than the author gives themcredit for - they have observed what has occurred in their neighboringcountries by "strategically aligning" with the West (read Pakistan,Afghanistan), and want to steer clear of playing puppet and focus onself-development, without needing to play second to anyone in the long-run. Itsa sensible strategy.
或许印度可以给外界做一个不结盟、非暴力、非“麻烦制造者”（如作者所说）的表率。或许印度政治精英比作者评价的更加高瞻远瞩——他们对和西方“战略结盟”的邻国所发生的情况非常清楚，他们想要避免被操控而专注于自身发展，不用长期扮演老二角色。这是明智的战略。
k_canadainreply to Zaphod_KMar 27th, 18:47
Well said Zaphod_K
说得好。
k_canadaMar27th, 18:58
I agree with both @skepticji and@Zaphod_K's observations on India. I would like to add to these points bysaying that there are two avenues that India should aggressively pursue (alongwith the whole raft of other things that they need to focus on) that will helpits long-term strategic objectives.
The first is self-reliance in thearea of energy. Given its geographic location and its natural strengths(tropical climate, biodiversity), India has a golden opportunity to become aleader in energy innovation (particularly in the area of green energy). Thiswill allow for reduced dependence on the imports of oil and will strengthenIndia's hand vis a vis its neighbours and the West.
The second area would beinvestment in the navy. I think it's critical that India focus on strengtheningits navy to ensure a strong presence in the Indian Ocean.
我赞同楼上两位对印度的观点。但我想补充说说印度应该努力做到的两点（和其它他们需要全力以赴的一样），这将有助于他们实现长期战略。
第一就是能源自给。鉴于印度的地理位置和自身自然环境（热带气候、丰富的自然多样性），印度有绝佳机会成为能源革命的领头羊（尤其是在绿色能源领域）。这能让印度减少对进口石油的依赖，并增强它和邻国及西方抗衡的能力。第二就是加大海军投入。我想印度加大海军投入以确保其在印度洋的强大存在是至关重要的。
In the long runMar27th, 19:11
What a dumb article. Indians needto spend billions on defense like they need a hole in the head.
India has a multitude of problemsinternally. We're not even talking about education or jobs, this is a countrythat cannot even provide clean toilets, reliable energy or clean drinking wateror basic infrastructure for 80% of its population. Such a country has nobusiness trying to be a world superpower. And only a country that is stupidbeyond believe or suicidal would want to invade a poverty stricken hell holelike India, with no natural resources to speak of and a billion hungry people.While I wouldn't put it pass the US or any NATO country to make such a dumbmove, the Chinese are a lot smarter.
This article is nothing more thana sales pitch for the US defense industry. If Indians have any brain they'd dowell to ignore it and go about what they do everyday, which is trying to makelife better for themselves and their family. Forget trying to be a tool forwestern powers.
什么垃圾文章。印度在国防上投入数十亿纯粹是脑子进水了。
印度有很多的国内问题。别说什么教育或者就业问题了，他们80%的人口连干净的厕所、可靠的能源、干净的饮用水和基础设施都没有。这样的国家别想做什么世界超级大国。而且除非是疯了或者是想自杀，否则没有国家想要侵略毫无自然资源可言且有着10亿饥饿人口的见鬼的穷国印度。我不相信美国或者任何北约国家会采取这么愚蠢的行动，中国则聪明得多了不用提了。
这篇文章纯粹是美国的军工产业推销软文。印度人只要稍有点脑子的话，就应该不搭理这文章然后正常干每天干的事情，为自己和国家更好的未来努力。别成为西方强国的工具。
RajaPoruinreply to In the long runMar 27th, 23:55
Bingo ! Dead on ！！
说的太对了！
AussieLouisinreply to In the long runMar 28th, 05:24
Perhaps the author of thisarticle, if he truly cares about Indians, could persuade Britain to return someof the much needed treasures it stole from India.
If nothing else, it would help tokeep some of the toilets clean, so more tourists could come and gawd!
如果这篇文章的作者真的关心印度的话，他应该说服英国归还从印度偷走的金银财宝。
不出什么以外的话，这有助于他们保持厕所的整洁，这样一来会有更多的观光客。
HeSaidWhat...inreply to AussieLouisMar 28th, 06:48
Agreed. The British can start withreturning the crown jewel to India. Greek statues to Greece... These countriesneed them a lot more than Westminster.
是的，英国应该先把女王皇冠上的钻石还给印度，把希腊的雕像还给希腊……他们比白金汉宫更需要这些珍宝。
VodkaredbullMar27th, 20:26
The future of the world will liein the realm of multilateralism and non-alignment. India, more than any othercountry understands this. The writer should rather understand that alignmentand the whole idea of being a superpower, is instead "obsolete."
世界的未来会是多极和不结盟的，印度比其他任何国家都更了解这点。作者应该明白结盟和成为超级大国的理念是落伍的。
RajaPoruinreply to VodkaredbullMar 27th, 23:51
Wow ! Let me sell you someswampland !
天那！你这个傻瓜！
Connect The DotsMar27th, 20:38
The mistake is lumping India withthe East Asian Confucian Economies.
Japan, Taiwan, South Korea,Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan are high tech and high income modern economies.
China will eventually emulate andapproach the modernity, quality of life and wage parity of the 4 Tigers.
But China is bigger than all ofthem combined--and doubled.
India is a SubcontinentalIndo-Asian Economy.
India's peers are Pakistan, SriLanka, and Bangladesh.
Combined in population, theSubcontinent accounts for one-third of humanity.
More hunger than Africa.
More shortage of clean water andtoilets than Africa.
More poverty than Africa.
And receiving more NGO Aid thanAfrica.
In the Subcontinent, India is theleader of the pack.
But compared to the ConfucianAsian Economies, India is a distant laggard.
India is booming, no differentthan other neighbors of China that reciprocate trade with the booming Chineseeconomy. India is growing fast but at no better rates than South Korea, Taiwan,Singapore, Vietnam, Cambodia, Myanmar, Tibet and Russia.
And it is wrong and futile tocompare India to China.
They are both Asian but indifferent universes.
It is the difference betweenConfucianism and Hinduism.
文章的错误就在于将印度和东亚儒家圈的经济混为一谈了。
日本、台湾（地区）、韩国、新加坡、香港和台湾（地区，台湾重复了啊）拥有较高的技术水平和高收益的现代经济模式。中国最终会效仿并实现现代化，人民生活质量和工资待遇会和四小虎的水平相当。
但是中国（的经济规模）比它们所有加起来的两倍还大。
而印度则是印度次大陆的经济模式。
和印度同等层次的是巴基斯坦、斯里兰卡和孟加拉国。
印度次大陆的总人口是世界人口的1/3。
比非洲的饥饿人数多。
比非洲还更欠缺干净水和厕所。
比非洲贫穷。
接受的非政府援助比非洲还多。
在次大陆区域，印度算是领头羊。
但是和亚洲儒家圈相比，印度落后的太多了。
印度和中国的其他邻国一样，因为受到迅速增长的中国经济的提携而快速发展。印度的经济增速并不比韩国、台湾（地区）、新加坡、越南、柬埔寨、缅甸、XZ（地区）和俄罗斯快。
而把印度拿来和中国相比是错误的，也是毫无意义的。
他们同处亚洲但截然不同。
这就是儒学和印度教的区别。
DavidFrawleyinreply to Connect The DotsMar 27th, 20:50
All you did was conflate a lot ofissues with Hinduism. India is yet to become a Hindu nation with Hindu values.India has been denying its Hindu identity ever since that brown Englishman,Hindu-loathing Nehru become Prime Minister.
你过多地把所有问题推给了印度教。印度没有变成印度教价值观为主的印度教国家。从棕色皮肤讨厌印度教的英国人尼赫鲁成为总理以来，印度就已经否认了它身上的印度教标签。
MostJustWantPeaceinreply to DavidFrawleyMar 27th, 22:40
Is Nehru considered a "brownEnglishman" because of his trysts with Lord Mountbatten's wife?
是不是因为尼赫鲁和蒙巴顿公爵的夫人约会，所以就被认为是“棕色皮肤的英国人”？
RajaPoruinreply to Connect The DotsMar 27th, 23:45
.... and Confucianism is waysuperior, bro !
……儒学更高端，兄弟！
RajaPoruinreply to MostJustWantPeaceMar 27th, 23:49
Very clever ! Mountbatten's wifewas English. For a tryst, a discriminating person would not select anEnglishwoman, perfect though they may be in all other respects. Personally, anAmerican lady would be far better and more delightful and totally unforgettableor more lovable, but I digress. Nehru was just fine. One always emulates theculture of the conqueror. It's how life is. Get used to it.
真聪明！蒙巴顿的夫人是英国人。从约会的角度来说，一个明智的人是不会选择英国女人的，虽然她可能在其他方面都很优秀。我个人认为英国女人非常好而且讨人喜欢、令人难忘或者很可爱，哦我扯远了。尼赫鲁挺不错的，他努力去效仿征服者的文明。这就是生活，你要习惯它。
GodricGriffindorinreply to Connect The DotsMar 28th, 01:00
You seem to have a verysuperficial outlook towards India. I don't see how a country's peers arerelated to its development. So lets say Israel is in a parallel universe simplybecause its neighbors are socially backward Arab states.
你对印度的认识非常肤浅。我不明白一个国家的层次和它的发展水平有什么关系。如果要这么说的话，以色列就是在平行宇宙中（译注：非现实的），要知道它的邻国都是落后的阿拉伯国家。
Connect The Dotsinreply to GodricGriffindorMar 28th, 13:34
It is not simply peers...it isculture, religion, personal industry, education, use of capital, innovation andthe gene pool.
Arabs and Israelis agree they areday and night in ANY meaningful comparison.
Indians, Pakistani and SriLankans are one big gene pool and Hindustan culture. Less than one generationago they were one big united country in the Empire.
这不是简单的类比……它涉及到文化、宗教信仰、小工业、教育、资金利用、创新精神和遗传基因等方方面面。
阿拉伯和以色列都会认同无论从任何方面来对比，它们都处在不同层面。
印度、巴基斯坦和斯里兰卡的人种遗传基因是同源的，而且同处印度教文化圈。上一代人的时候它们还都在同一个帝国的统治之下呢。
AshishMar27th, 20:58
We need to improve DomesticInfrastructure first before We Bother with becoming a Great power!!!
What a Silly Article!
在想着成为强国之前，我们要先改善国内基础设施！！！
这狗屁文章！
DavidFrawleyMar27th, 21:11
The Economist is as condescendingas ever when it comes to India. It still imagines that it can dictate to 'itscolony'. This is the result of never really letting go of the 'crown jewel' ofthe British Empire which would not have amounted to much had the British notraped, looted, subjugated and practised genocide in India. But alas, it is an independentnation. The British rewrote history that was pure fiction and propaganda; itsought to deny the great history of the Hindu nation that gave the world muchof its civilisation, maths and science and its values.
By stating that India shares'western values' is akin to putting the cart before the horse; it is the westthat has taken on Indian-Hindu values. Modern Christianity, which is still awork in progress resembled more the Islam of today for at least a 1000 years.
India will become a state definedby Hinduism; which is the world's only truly universal ethos. The era ofdenying and trivialising Hindus is almost at an end. Congress Party of India ishindering India's and the world's material and spiritual growth.
一谈到印度经济学人就惺惺作态起来了。似乎还在对它的“殖民地”发号施令。这就是没有摘下大英帝国“王冠上的珠宝”的结果，似乎英国从来没有在印度强奸、劫掠、侵略和大规模屠杀似的。但是现在印度成了独立国家了，于是英国改写历史，一派胡言。它否认印度向世界输出文化、数学、科学和价值观的伟大历史。说什么印度拥有共同的“西方价值观”完全是颠倒黑白，其实是西方接受了印度教价值观。现代基督教文明更像是1000年前至今未变的伊斯兰文明。
印度会成为一个印度教国家，印度教文明是唯一的普世价值观。否认和平庸化印度教文明的时代结束了。印度国大党阻碍了印度和全世界的物质和精神的进步发展。
Curate's Egginreply to DavidFrawleyMar 27th, 23:24
Relax, my religious extremistpal, the Economist is a newspaper, and therefore it can write about any countryanywhere in the world.
Your logic would have you forbida German newspaper saying ANYTHING about Israel. Not much of a logic, is it?
放松点，宗教偏执狂。经济学人是新闻媒体，所以它们想写哪个国家就写哪个国家。
按照你的逻辑，德国的媒体就不能对以色列做出任何评价。这不科学是吧？
RajaPoruinreply to DavidFrawleyMar 27th, 23:44
Hinduism is just the Taliban witha darker skin, except for the very superior Brahmins who look like Albanians.
印度教就是黑皮肤的塔利班，除了上层人士之外，他们看着像阿尔巴尼亚人。
AussieLouisinreply to DavidFrawleyMar 28th, 05:07
"This is the result of neverreally letting go of the 'crown jewel' of the British Empire which would nothave amounted to much had the British not raped, looted, subjugated andpractised genocide in India."
Truth be told, the treasures ofBritain are mostly Indian treasures, stolen whilst they were doing the above.They stole largely too from China and the Chinese are now devising ways to getsome of their British-looted treasures back. This is getting the Britishworried and thus their prayers and hopes that China would never be powerfulenough to demand it! Thus their incessant and obsessive fault-finding withChina's remarkable economic development and anything Chinese, as observable bythe typically anti-Chinese tenor of this article.
It always puzzled me why theIndians never thought of wanting their treasures back. Even the little Greeknation wants back the so-called Elgin marble, pieces of rock writing importantto Greek historical heritage, shamelessly taken back to Britain by a typicalkleptomaniac Britisher whom they elevated to a Lord; my word!
Perhaps, there's somethinglacking in Indian pride when looking up at their past masters?
说实话，英国的大部分财产都是它在印度干那些坏事的时候劫来的。他们在中国也抢了不少，现在中国人正想法设法要回这些赃物。这让英国人很紧张，所以他们就祈祷并希望中国永远不要强大到能够索回赃物的时候！因此他们没完没了地在中国令人瞩目的经济成就和任何事情上挑刺，比如很明显地在这篇文章中的反中论调。
我一直有一个疑问，为什么印度不要回他们的珍宝呢？就连小国希腊都要求英国归还埃尔金大理石雕像，一块希腊重要历史遗产的小石块，一个被他们选为国王的英国盗窃狂可耻地从希腊夺走带回到英国，苍天呐！
或许在面对前主人时，印度人少了点自尊心？
MostJustWantPeaceinreply to AussieLouisMar 28th, 06:03
I think the first treasure Chinashould demand back are the collection of texts form the Mogao Caves inDunhuang. This collection includes a Chinese translation of the Diamond Sutra,the oldest surviving printed book in the world!
我觉得中国要求英国归还的第一件珍宝就是敦煌莫高窟出土的书册。这些书册中包括《金刚经》的汉译本，全世界最早的印刷版图书！
biswajitroyinreply to AussieLouisMar 28th, 13:30
For an estimate, British empirehad generated revenue from India to the tune of 8 trillion us dollars adjustedfor inflation over 200 years rule.
据估算，大英帝国在200年的统治时期内，从印度掠走的财产根据通货膨胀系数修正后达到8万亿美元。
biswajitroyinreply to MostJustWantPeaceMar 28th, 13:31
diamond sutra interesting, is itrelated to the kama sutra?
《金刚经》，很有意思，和《性爱宝典》有什么联系吗？
http://www.ltaaa.com/wtfy/8216.html
discovery1Mar27th, 17:37
I just want to say that I reallylike the picture that goes with this article.
我只想说我很喜欢文章的配图。
我只想说我想看文章的配图~
I just want to say that I reallylike the picture that goes with this article.
我只想说我很喜欢文章的配图。
我只想说我想看文章的配图~
errison 发表于 2013-3-30 17:51 
discovery1Mar27th, 17:37
I just want to say that I reallylike the picture that goes with this artic ...
那个大学毕业的？
discovery1Mar27th, 17:37
I just want to say that I reallylike the picture that goes with this artic ...
那个大学毕业的？
陆仁贾 发表于 2013-3-30 19:07
那个大学毕业的？
啥意思？
那个大学毕业的？
啥意思？errison 发表于 2013-3-30 19:08
啥意思？
乃的英文这么好，是不是外国语大学毕业
啥意思？
乃的英文这么好，是不是外国语大学毕业陆仁贾 发表于 2013-3-30 19:40
乃的英文这么好，是不是外国语大学毕业
我晕，我是复制黏贴乃主贴上的英文和翻译呀~~~
乃的英文这么好，是不是外国语大学毕业
我晕，我是复制黏贴乃主贴上的英文和翻译呀~~~
errison 发表于 2013-3-30 19:43
我晕，我是复制黏贴乃主贴上的英文和翻译呀~~~
···························································当我没路过··········································································
我晕，我是复制黏贴乃主贴上的英文和翻译呀~~~
···························································当我没路过··········································································
人前进的时候要心怀远志，眼看脚下，脚踏实地，感觉三哥总是骄傲的心怀大志，眼看远方，所以脚下总是磕磕绊绊的。
现在看来
印度人对英国人还有不少怨念啊
印度人对英国人还有不少怨念啊
但联合国安理会5个常任理事国也都支持印度入常
这是哪个位面的联合国？
这是哪个位面的联合国？
但联合国安理会5个常任理事国也都支持印度入常
这是哪个位面的联合国？
第三位面的
这是哪个位面的联合国？
第三位面的