The passages given below are followed by a set of questions. Choose the most…

The passages given below are followed by a set of questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.

It is a measure of our obsession with the K-word and Pakistan, that the six-day state visit of Chinese premier Zhu Rong Ji to the Indian shores has barely created a ripple in the media. Apart from the odd ministerial statement and the mandatory picture of Mr. Zhu and his wife in front of the Taj, one could almost be excused for thinking that the Chinese premier- the second most powerful leader from the middle kingdom- was in India to pay a casual private visit. Let's face it: Beijing has emerged as a major world player in economic and strategic terms. If the long 20th century belonged to America, the new millennium probably belongs to the oriental dragon. Part of the lukewarm Indian response has its roots in our genuine lack of knowledge of and interest in matters Chinese. Most of what we know about China is second-hand, mediated by the cares and concerns of the west. From policy institutions to strategic think tanks to Swadeshi centers of higher learning, there is a little premium on first-hand information about are a powerful eastern neighbor. The few images we have are inexorably bound up with bitter memories of the 1962 border war, namely, Beijing’s betrayal in the face of Nehru’s idealistic crises of “Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai”. In the four decades since, Indian Marxists might have kept their tryst with Mao and its market successor, but the mainstream political establishment has veered between Paranoia and bouts of wistful envy about the economic miracle that is China.

The skeptic would argue that given the specialties that bind Beijing to Islamabad, there is a little realistic possibility of serious Indo-Chinese engagement. But that would be to misunderstand China’s recent policy record both at home and abroad. From foreign affairs to the economy, post-Mao China has displayed, barring political and human rights aberrations, a profound sense of pragmatism and a willingness to change. This is exemplified as much as in a steady improvement in our bilateral relations. Notwithstanding a long-standing border dispute and the continued irritant of New Delhi’s support for Tibetan cause. As in Beijing’s refusal to toe Islamabad’s line on the all-important Kashmir issue. Host September 11, there is also a shared concern on the issue of terrorism. Like New Delhi, Beijing to is hounded by the specter of terrorism, albeit on a smaller scale, in Xing Xiang province. Add to the Beijing’s fear about Pax Americana, now including a potentially permanent U.S military presence in South –Asia through Pakistan, and it gives policy wonks in New Delhi more than enough to chew on. Aside from strategic concern and co-operation, Beijing today is a global economic player of exceptional strength and depth. India has so far, largely failed to learn or benefit from Beijing’s brand of hard-headed market economics. While trade and investment between the two countries have increased in recent times, it is a mere pittance if viewed in the light of Beijing’s annual trade of half-a-trillion dollars. If Mr.Zhu’s visit can help re-focus the relationship between the two Asian giants, from sporadic suspicion and long-term indifference to sustained economic cooperation, then he will have done much to bring down the Chinese wall.

According to the passage:

I. India was never interested in learning from the Chinese experience of market economics.

II. India couldn't recognize the importance of learning lessons from the Chinese experience of market economics.

III. India has rejected the Chinese model of market economics.