Round The
World
New Delhi, 17 October 2019
Ducking The Dragon
DELHI SENDING WRONG SIGNALS
By Dr D.K. Giri
(Prof. International Politics, JMI)
Chinese President Xi
Jinping’s visit to India last week did not generate adequate debate it should
have, on the purpose and outcome. Many Modi admirers are trying desperately to
discern some sagacity and strategy in South Block in hosting the Chinese
premier in the wake of his critical reactions vis-a-vis the developments in
Kashmir. Some of us thought it was a self-goal as it may have sent wrong
signals to both our friends and critics in the international community.
There are two schools
of thought on our dealing with China. One would think it is a zero-sum-game,
yet we have to deal with China as it is our biggest neighbour. The second
school suggests that, given Chinese military and economic might, we have to
manage China and minimise its animosity towards India. The third school of
thought, which is sadly absent, is to confront and contain Chinese hegemonic ambitions.
I, for one, argue for this line and show how it would help India’s
international image.
According to the
first school, even though we may not expect much goodwill from Beijing, we need
to continue the dialogue, so that bonhomie can dilute the brinkmanship, and
China would do less harm to India. That is why even though, we do not have a
concrete agenda to talk, the informal summits can help rebuild confidence and
make-up the trust deficit etc. Some analysts would optimistically suggest that
such summits hint at bigger things through symbolism, backed by pomp and
pageantry. It is for the diplomats, bureaucrats and strategy analysts to fathom
deep into the moods and minds of the leaders, unpack their postures and
perspectives and translate them into action.
This was the spirit
of Wuhan, the outcome of Modi’s meeting Xi at Sanghai in 2017 in terms of
‘Asthana consensus’ and the atmosphere at Mamallapuram, Tamil Nadu. They would
refer to the helpful pronouncement in Wuhan, “to solve bilateral problems
through dialogue and cooperation”, and in Mamallapuram “to deepen economic
corporation, to achieve enhanced trade and commercial relations, to better
balance bilateral trade and to encourage mutual investments etc.” In such
summits, the apologists argue the gains are incremental and optical.
The second group talks
about a practical approach of dealing with the Chinese mighty economy and to an
extent the military. They tell us that the biggest take-away from this meeting
is the High-level Economic and Trade Dialogue. Modi got Xi to pay “sincere”
attention to the growing trade deficit for India which stands at $53 billion.
China has agreed to 2+1 formulae for projects, meaning India and China together
doing projects in the third countries. The example touted for such cooperation
is the joint training offered by Beijing- New Delhi to Afghan diplomats. Xi
Jinping also offered India cooperation in defence sector, allowed Indian pharma
companies to invest in China.
Both the leaders
carefully avoided the ‘touchy issues’ like Kashmir, BRI, Regional Commercial
and Economic Cooperation led by China and so on. India offered 5 year visa to
Chinese nationals with multiple entries etc. These again are symbolic gestures.
The third way is to
confront and contain China for which New Delhi is evading or unwilling. When
the Dragon hisses, the elephant does not even wag its tale, forget its roaring.
In fact, this has been the dilemma of New Delhi’s policy towards China,
starting from the off. Our first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru was
inexplicably enamoured or sympathetic to Chinese who were struggling to shake
off dictatorship. He allowed himself to be charmed by the Chinese lulling him
to complacency that resulted in the war of 1962. He gave up the Security
Council membership offered by both USA and USSR in favour of China. Tibet, a
buffer zone, created by the British between India & China was given away
without reciprocal gains. We are still paying for such costly mistakes.
The Modi regime is
doing no better vis-a-vis China. Modi admirers would say New Delhi is demanding
reciprocity from Beijing. That is a tall and unverifiable claim. Modi
administration is unable to read the Chinese mind, for instance, the Chinese
strategy for endless negotiations and the tactics to tire the enemy out by
protracted parleys, in the line of ‘Art of War’ by Tsun Sui. Modi still thinks
he can charm his way to Xi Jinping, so he still believes in “swing and stroll’
diplomacy, which they began in Wuhan. In Mamallapuram, they strolled around for
hours in the beaches of Tamil Nadu, and had two-and-half-hour long dinner. What
was the result? Tangibly little!
Well, Modi was
perhaps wanting to build and manage perceptions about Beijing-New Delhi
relations. Evaluating the ‘perception diplomacy’, one can decode again two
kinds of impact. One, New Delhi is attempting to tell the world that India can
stand on par with China despite having 5 times less GDP, and 2 times less or so
in military. The other could be that New Delhi is simply ducking the Dragon,
avoiding a direct confrontation. To my mind, the latter is more probable as the
actions of India’s allies and partners show.
Given the overt
antagonism by Beijing, for New Delhi not to react at all and host the Chinese
premier with much pomp and show, amounted to a self-goal. Beijing was the first
and only country in the world to take Kashmir to the UN. Later Turkey and
Malaysia followed. It was Beijing that blocked for 10 years the declaration of
Masood Azhar as the international terrorist. It is Beijing that is blocking
India’s membership of the Security Council and nuclear supplier group. China is
making territorial claims on Arunachal Pradesh, Ladakh and other parts.
Leaving only hours
before for India, Xi Jinping said, “he was watching Kashmir” and days before,
he had hosted the Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan and Pak Army General
Bajwa. New Delhi refuses to talk to Pakistan as it funds terror and attempts to
destabilise India. Why does India engage with China which openly supports
Pakistan and its terrorists? Is it simply because China is a bigger power? When
Beijing says, “We are watching Kashmir”, why not New Delhi says, “we are
watching Hong Kong, Tibet and Xinjiang”. Such strategy of ‘no retaliation’ which
can be perceived as ducking can be used as an alibi for countries like Nepal to
jump into Chinese bandwagon.
That is what exactly
happened. Nepal signed about 20 agreements with China. Kathmandu could turn
around and say, if you spread the red carpet for your rival China, shall we not
welcome them as we are a lesser power. New Delhi must realise, China secured
independence through a violent arms struggle unlike our pacifist movement for
independence.
China understands the
language of ‘power’. Agreed, New Delhi cannot match one-to-one China in economy
or military terms, not now or in near future. But there is a thing called
‘derived power’. New Delhi could draw power from its strategic alliances like
‘Quad’. It can construct a ‘virtuous circle’, to make up its capacity gap’ with
China which suffers heavily from political deficit. New Delhi is sending wrong
signals by ducking the dragon.---INFA
(Copyright, India
News & Feature Alliance)
|