Virendra Gupta
The strategic dialogue with China on 22nd Feb would have afforded us a useful opportunity to take up the whole range of ‘friction points’ in a frank environment. China has so far adopted a highly dismissive and antagonistic attitude on issues of concern to us and unless we show inclination for a more assertive approach there would be little likelihood of any headway in these or any further talks.
In dealing with China, we have generally sought to follow a conciliatory approach, focussing on areas of convergence and showing readiness to work together on world issues, keeping in view China’s emergence as a global power. China on the other hand does not seem comfortable with India’s simultaneous rise and seeks to keep us embroiled in the region.
| Highlights of the Dialogue 1. India explained its rationale to China on the listing of Azhar under UN 1267 sanctions committee during this strategic talk. |
China is one of the main obstacles in our attempts to secure permanent membership of UN Security Council and works closely with the coffee club countries which openly oppose reform of that important body. China has also actively opposed India’s membership of the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group (NSG) because of its unjustified obsession on equating India with Pakistan.
China continues to block our request for inclusion of dreaded terrorist Maulana Masood Azhar in the 1267 UNSC sanctions list, despite the proposal having been backed by USA and other countries, using specious arguement about lack of evidence. In substantive terms, inclusion in the list by itself, may not mean very much since it only stipulates freeze of financial assets and travel ban and would not obligate Pakistan to arrest him. In fact, another terrorist Hafeez Saeed, founder of LET who was the mastermind of 26/11 Mumbai terror attack, roams around rather freely in Pakistan despite UN sanctions against him since 2008 and a US govt bounty on him. The only action that Pakistan government has taken is to put him under token house arrest occasionally. Agreeing to India’s request on Masood Azhar’s case would thus at best have been of symbolic value, but China, probably acting at the behest of Pakistan, is unwilling to accommodate us even though the issue has become very emotive with people in India.
Chinese stance on Masood Azhar is baffling since it has itself been battling growing Islamic radicalization of Uighur youth in its north-western border province of Xinjiang. Uighurs, who are Sunni moslem, comprise around 45% of the province’s population and government’s repressive measures to assimilate them in the Han Chinese culture have not succeeded resulting in a secessionist movement. There are reports suggesting that training for the radical youth from Xinjiang is being provided in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
We have made sincere efforts to build good neighbourly relations with China, giving due consideration to its sensitivities on issues such as Taiwan and Tibet and have also facilitated security clearances for its investments in key infrastructure projects in India. But, how long can we sustain our defensive and conciliatory approach if we do not find China reciprocating these sentiments. We cannot afford to let China interpret our policies and actions as a sign of weakness and must be prepared to exercise all available leverages in a self-confident and assertive manner.
We have a rapidly burgeoning trade deficit with China. Overall trade figure of US $ 70 billion p.a. may sound quite impressive but when one looks at our trade deficit of US $ 53 billion and our exports being under US $ 10 billion and that too comprising mainly of primary and intermediate products, it is clear that that trade is not of much benefit to us. In fact, import of cheap consumer products from China has emasculated our manufacturing sector making a travesty of our ‘Make in India’ campaign. Despite this, China continues to impose non-tariff barriers on Indian exports to China. Lack of transparency regarding technical standards and differentiated testing requirements for domestic and imported products are all designed to restrict imports. There are sanitary and phyto-sanitary issues facing our agricultural/meat products and regulatory hurdles have continued to impede export of generic drugs from India in which we have a world leadership position. India’s pitch for greater market access in another of our strength areas, IT sector, has also likewise not made much headway. Chinese only pay lip service to the need to rectify growing trade imbalance, whenever this matter is taken up with them but rarely follow up with any concrete measures. It is time that we tighten imports from China, in retaliation, since that is the only language that would be understood by it. This can be done in a variety of ways without violating WTO obligations. Many Chinese products would attract the anti-dumping
provisions and we should not hesitate in aggressively initiating requisite action wherever possible. Any temporary adverse impact on trade would not
be detrimental to our overall
economic interests.
Chinese connections in Pakistan involving diplomatic support, massive economic investment, supply of military equipment and technology at concessional rates and support for nuclear arsenal in violation of its treaty obligations under NPT which it solemnly invokes in dealing with us are, without doubt, detrimental to India’s security. With Trump scripting a new narrative for strategic doctrine based on China having replaced Russia as a primary threat to USA, and given India’s growing strategic connect with USA, the China-Pakistan axis is bound to deepen further in the coming years and we would need to be fully mindful of that development on our strategic landscape.
China has initiated an ambitious array of civil and military infrastructure projects in the energy sector, highways and railways valuing over US $ 50 b connecting Xinjiang with Gwadar port in Pakistan under China-Pakistan Economic Corridor(CPEC) which would provide it strategic access to the Indian ocean. We have rightly objected to it since it involves projects in POK. China has, however, completely brushed aside our protestations and decided to go ahead with those projects, even though on its own part it is obsessively sensitive to sovereignty issues. Surprisingly there are voices in India which are advocating that rather than objecting we should join those projects for the sake of economic benefits! So far, economic engagement with China has resulted more in exploitation than any long term benefit to India as indeed has been the experience of many African countries who have accused China of backdoor economic imperialism.
We subscribe to one-China policy, but without deviating from that stated policy it is possible to create sufficient legroom from us. USA also publicly conforms to that policy but look at the range of its contacts in Taipei. In that regard, our hosting a parliamentary delegation from Taiwan earlier in the month was a step in the right direction. Expectedly, the Chinese did lodge a protest but we dismissed that noting that “such informal groups have visited India in the past” and that “no political meaning” should be read into that. Exchanges in diverse fields with Taiwan ought to be intensified to take advantage of our inherent complementarities and Taiwan’s strength in the manufacturing and hardware sector. So far, Taiwanese investments have remained quite low but under PM Modi that situation is due to change with Foxcom Investment firm having already announced huge new investments into India. Incidentally, PM Modi as Gujrat Chief Minister had hosted a very large business delegation from Taiwan
in 2011.
We seem to have completely given up on Tibet question as a leverage in our relations with China. In the words of noted strategic analyst Brahma Chellaney, in 1954 PM Nehru “surrendered India’s extraterritorial rights in Tibet — inherited from Britain at independence — and accepted the existence of the ‘Tibet region of China’ with no quid pro quo not even Beijing’s acknowledgement of the then-prevailing Indo-Tibetan border.” There is need to reinject a bit of flexibility and nuance into our Tibet stance by, for instance, providing greater political visibility and profile to our contacts with Dalai Lama. China is extremely sensitive on the Tibet issue and the recent meeting between Dalai Lama and our President did perturb it. We should however not only remain unconcerned with the Chinese objections, but seek to deliberately build up such provocations.
On South China Sea, India has affirmed “importance of safeguarding maritime security and ensuring freedom of navigation in South China Sea” urging all parties to “show utmost respect” for the UN backed tribunal’s ruling. China is obviously not satisfied with our guarded response and has asked us to clarify our position before considering our NSG membership case. We must continue to maintain our principled position on SCS and not get deterred from our production activities and further prospecting for oil and gas in the blocks allocated to us by Vietnam. We should simultaneously focus on improving our ties with Vietnam and upgrade their maritime security capabilities as a matter of strategic priority. Enhancement of our political and economic linkages with Japan should also be accorded due priority as that would not only bring economic dividends to India but also provide it requisite strategic depth.
There is suspicion in some quarters that our China policy is predicated on our apprehensions with regard to
possible military action by China against us in case of any provocation by us on issues of grave concern to it. That could well have been justified at some point of time since it is indeed true that we were caught completely off guard in 1962, but today we are fully prepared to take on any aggression from our northern neighbour. In that scenario, we can hardly justify timidity in our response to the Chinese.
We do want peaceful relations with China in order to better focus on our developmental imperatives but a weak-kneed approach in dealing with our northern neighbour would not serve our broad long term interests.
(The writer retired from the Indian Foreign Service and served as India’s Ambassador in many countries including Tanzania, Trinidad & Tobago
and South Africa )
Leave a Comment