# China-India trade



## Adams3 (Mar 2, 2007)

India-China trade has increased nearly 10-fold since 2000, showing an average annual growth of a whooping 45 %. Anyone here knows of any specific plans on land infrastructure building for the booming India-China trade? When you look at the map, you would think that a way through Burma either by road or railway would be the the most convenient route. I've registered that the Nathu-La pass on the border between Sikkim and Tibet has opened for trade, but only for a few selected products and just a tiny fraction of the 25 billion US dollar trade goes through the pass.

Generally I would think that it would be more logical for trade between the two giants to go by land. I'm aware that currently sea shipment in general is cheaper than land shipment per km traveled, but given the close distance by land versus the long detour through Malacca strait by sea, I would think land trade would be cheaper if a proper infrastructure is set up?


----------



## Lord_Bertrum (Jun 24, 2005)

Don't forget that most Chinese manufactured goods are made on the eastern seaboard of China.


----------



## DonQui (Jan 10, 2005)

There are likely many more ports versus the one pass through the massive Himalayan mountains.


----------



## Adams3 (Mar 2, 2007)

Lord_Bertrum said:


> Don't forget that most Chinese manufactured goods are made on the eastern seaboard of China.


I know this, but still. And trade is a two-way street.


----------



## Adams3 (Mar 2, 2007)

DonQui said:


> There are likely many more ports versus the one pass through the massive Himalayan mountains.


Could you elaborate please.


----------



## Huhu (Jun 5, 2004)

There are two other points of entry between China and India in the Himalayas: Shipkila in Himachal Pradesh (just south of Kashmir) and Lipulekh in Uttarakhand (farther southeast from Kashmir, near Nepal).

Overland trade between China and India depends on the shipment or production of goods in Tibet, which was very costly until the Qinghai-Tibet Railway opened recently. Still, until the rail network is expanded, the single railway link will act as a bottleneck. Sea trade is more efficient and can accommodate greater volume at the moment.


----------



## Sen (Nov 13, 2004)

There isn't much China-India trade to speak of.


----------



## Huhu (Jun 5, 2004)

Sen said:


> There isn't much China-India trade to speak of.


The target for 2008 in bilateral trade is USD 20 Billion. In 2004 it was USD 7 billion, increase of over %40 from 2003.


----------



## Adams3 (Mar 2, 2007)

Sen said:


> There isn't much China-India trade to speak of.


You don't think trade in 2006 valued at 25 billion dollars, a 10-fold increase since 2000, is anything to speak of? If that is nothing to speak of, I don't know what is.


----------



## Adams3 (Mar 2, 2007)

Huhu said:


> The target for 2008 in bilateral trade is USD 20 Billion. In 2004 it was USD 7 billion, increase of over %40 from 2003.


It surpassed that target last year. It was USD 25 billion in 2006.


----------



## Adams3 (Mar 2, 2007)

Huhu said:


> There are two other points of entry between China and India in the Himalayas: Shipkila in Himachal Pradesh (just south of Kashmir) and Lipulekh in Uttarakhand (farther southeast from Kashmir, near Nepal).
> 
> Overland trade between China and India depends on the shipment or production of goods in Tibet, which was very costly until the Qinghai-Tibet Railway opened recently. Still, until the rail network is expanded, the single railway link will act as a bottleneck. Sea trade is more efficient and can accommodate greater volume at the moment.


As I say in the opening post, I would think a route through Burma would be the most logical perhaps...


----------



## Huhu (Jun 5, 2004)

Adams3 said:


> As I say in the opening post, I would think a route through Burma would be the most logical perhaps...


AFAIK a major route through Burma isn't in the works at the moment. However, there is a planned rail link from Sichuan into Tibet which would increase trade capacity.


----------



## Adams3 (Mar 2, 2007)

Huhu said:


> AFAIK a major route through Burma isn't in the works at the moment. However, there is a planned rail link from Sichuan into Tibet which would increase trade capacity.


Yeah, that's another very good option. It seems very logical given the heavy industrializiation in Chongqing-Chengdu area and also given Chongqing status as a railway hub. Do you have any info about this, I would greatly appreciate it.


----------



## eusebius (Jan 5, 2004)

Indeed, after Japan had capitulated in 1945, the grand works in Burma came to grinding halt.


----------



## kronik (Aug 12, 2004)

I don't have a lot of knowledge on the land routes between India and China but I think the sea route is still the cheapest way for transport of goods. 

Even if Burma is used as a medium, it is still easier to ship goods from Burma to India's Eastern ports than through the North-East. Although India is developing a port in Burma but I think that has to do more with the economic connectivity of the North-East, and China will be a big feature in that.


----------



## Sen (Nov 13, 2004)

there was a road built that linked india to burma to yunan province in China, it was used as a supply line for Chinese troops fighting Japanese, the supplies would be shipped from Brtish India to Yunan using trucks, Japanese bombed it and they started to fly the supplies (search Flying Tigers). anyways it was a shitty road anyways, with a lot of curves and very low speed limit, at one place there was 18 consectuvie sharp turns I doubt it will be good way of transporting goods, it is really cheaper to transport by sea.

China also had a plan to build a canal in southern thailand to divert some of the traffic from Malacca, because of pirates and national security,but also to save time(about 2 days I think) Japan also seemd to be interested at this proposal, but I think Thais are not too flattered with this idea since it would physically separate the muslim south with the buddhist north, therefore further fuel the separatist sentiment in muslim south, so it was never realized.


----------



## Adams3 (Mar 2, 2007)

Yeah, the Krai canal in Thailand is an interesting idea. Singapore wouldn't be too happy about it though. 

If the trade between India and China grows at the same pace as it has done in the last 6 years, it will reach a staggering 100 billion by 2010. China will be India's largest trading partner by that time. I think it will make sense to explore all options regarding trade routes, because the potential is enormous. The cost of infrastructure works in Burma, India's north-east or by Sichuan-Tibet-India can quickly be recovered with these kind of trade volumes.


----------



## tiger (Aug 21, 2004)

Even if they can build a railway connecting Chongqing and then shiped by Yangtze river,the cost will still be very high.


----------



## Adams3 (Mar 2, 2007)

tiger said:


> Even if they can build a railway connecting Chongqing and then shiped by Yangtze river,the cost will still be very high.


Why does it have to be shipped by Yangtze river? Why not normal train cargo? A Chongqing-Chengdu-Tibet railway would be beneficial in itself I think. It's a big detour to go through Qinghai.


----------



## tiger (Aug 21, 2004)

Adams3 said:


> Why does it have to be shipped by Yangtze river? Why not normal train cargo?


Because transportation through Yangtze river is about 50% cheaper than by railway


----------



## Adams3 (Mar 2, 2007)

tiger said:


> Because transportation through Yangtze river is about 50% cheaper than by railway


Is it possible to ship the cargo from the India trade by Yangtze river though? Is it capacity for it?


----------



## tiger (Aug 21, 2004)

Adams3 said:


> Is it possible to ship the cargo from the India trade by Yangtze river though? Is it capacity for it?


I don't know,but I ever heard that Yangtze river was equivalent to 4-6 railway lines.


----------



## Huhu (Jun 5, 2004)

Adams3 said:


> Yeah, that's another very good option. It seems very logical given the heavy industrializiation in Chongqing-Chengdu area and also given Chongqing status as a railway hub. Do you have any info about this, I would greatly appreciate it.


The railway doesn't directly link to Sichuan, but goes through Dali in Yunnan, from Dali it can connect to Chengdu or Chongqing via Kunming. Other extensions include an extension west to Shigatse (the second largest city in Tibet) and south to Yadong near the checkpoint with India at Nathu-La.

http://zt.tibet.cn/english/zt/040719_qztl/..%5C040719_qztl/2004020051024161831.htm


----------



## Adams3 (Mar 2, 2007)

Huhu said:


> The railway doesn't directly link to Sichuan, but goes through Dali in Yunnan, from Dali it can connect to Chengdu or Chongqing via Kunming. Other extensions include an extension west to Shigatse (the second largest city in Tibet) and south to Yadong near the checkpoint with India at Nathu-La.
> 
> http://zt.tibet.cn/english/zt/040719_qztl/..%5C040719_qztl/2004020051024161831.htm


Would that Lhasa-Dali-Kunming-Chongqing line be much shorter than today's Chongqing-Chengdu-Golmud-Lhasa line though? Is the Dali extension of the Tibet line under construction atm?


----------



## Huhu (Jun 5, 2004)

Adams3 said:


> Would that Lhasa-Dali-Kunming-Chongqing line be much shorter than today's Chongqing-Chengdu-Golmud-Lhasa line though? Is the Dali extension of the Tibet line under construction atm?


I don't know exact distances but both involve significant detours to the north and south.

I can only find building confirmation for one of the new feeder lines: Lhasa to Shigatse.



> *Extension of Qinghai-Tibet railway to be completed in three years*
> _UPDATED: 21:53, March 08, 2007_
> 
> Linking Lhasa to Xigaze cities in Tibet, the construction of a 254-km extension line of the Qinghai- Tibet railway will start this year and is expected to be completed in 2010, a Tibetan official said here Thursday.
> ...


----------

