Mention China and India to economists and their first thought will be rapid growth, and second, how differently the two economies are achieving this: China took the conventional route of manufacturing-led growth and is now recognised as a global leader in manufactured exports.India followed the unconventional route of service-led growth and has acquired a global reputation for service exports.But is this stereotype changing? Are their growth patterns converging? Is China catching up in services? Is India catching up in manufacturing? Or has hysteresis kept their growth patterns different?

History has proved that whenever two rising powers sit next to each other, chances for conflict increase greatly, as their growing spheres of influence quickly overlap.This unfortunate constellation now becomes increasingly visible in Asia, where a rising China and a resurgent India begin to claim influence over the same regions.After India and Vietnam agreed to jointly explore oil in the South China Sea, a Chinese newspaper recently accused India of "poking its nose where it does not belong." China is busy creating alliances with India's neighbors, while India has-to China's dismay-begun to strengthen ties with its competitors- Japan, Australia, and the United States.

An intensive analysis of the US-China relationship is now necessary for broadening our own perspectives. A close examination of their dynamics reveals that the €power' factor stems from a variety of perspectives. Furthermore, it may not reflect the actual state of affairs, and may more accurately be described as a tension between American anxiety and Chinese aspirations. Not only is China the biggest market for the United States, American allies are trying to engage China as an economic partner. It can therefore be asked, under the circumstances, whether or not €lack of mutual confidence' is a better description than €strategic distrust', because it leads directly to a necessity of Confidence Building Measures.

The US meanwhile, is extending its Asian connections, not only via APEC,but also through ARF,EAS and a larger presence in the Indian Sub-Continent.The US needs an antagonist - it is the only country which has an expansionist flag.And, it is in Asia that the Westphalian state reigns supreme.Behind the ASEAN rhetoric, one needs to look also at the arms build-up by key members,who have experienced extremely rapid economic development and have consequently put concomitant effort into modernizing their militaries. Asia is thus likely to present a highly complex scenario.Military confrontation is therefore not likely in the near future, but third party conflicts might draw in both USA & China.

India must pay close attention to domestic developments in China.Dealing simultaneously with the two most powerful states -one distant and the other in the neighbourhood, would also require different strategies and would depend on the specific context and circumstances.The €Indo-Pacific' will be the arena of the 21st century's geopolitical and geostrategic manoeuvres.This space,where the US will engage with Asia,may carry the danger of completely marginalizing the smaller powers.

How will India position itself? €Strategic autonomy' makes sense for India as an €emerging power' in a quasi-multipolar world, for maximizing its own options. BRICS is a possible roadmap to a transition to a new international system, not an endpoint, as other powers are also waiting in the wings.India should thus pay greater attention to these other emerging powers, since it enjoys a positional maneuverability.