Excellent study material for all civil services aspirants - begin learning - Kar ke dikhayenge!
SHARE:
Why India needs to study China more deeply - MEA
S Jaishankar, January 28, 2021
Read more on - Polity | Economy | Schemes | S&T | Environment
- When: This was at the commencement of the 13th All India Conference of China Studies, by the Institute of Chinese Studies and IIT Madras China Studies Centre.
- The need for it: It was to discuss China studies from different perspectives. This included developments within China, matters pertaining to India-China relations, China’s ties with the rest of the world, and our own understanding of that society. There is no question that India needs to invest more deeply in the study of China. It’s salience in the global order is self-evident; and recent decades if anything have only heightened that prominence. The two nations of course have some similarities, especially of size and of history. But they are also a very interesting contrast in many ways, whether you think of it culturally, politically or economically. Both are in the process of building a modern nation state from a civilizational society and their parallel rise in the contemporary era, albeit at a differential pace and intensity, that is a relatively unique happening in human history.
- MEA initiatives on studying China: From a policy perspective, it is naturally to our advantage that there is solid expertise on China in India. The Ministry of External Affairs has set up a dedicated study centre on China. There also is something much broader than a strategic requirement. As both India and China have grown in recent decades, it was inevitable that they would have much more to do with each other. They both have seen that expressed in trade and in finance, in tourism and culture, and indeed, as we are seeing just now, in think-tanks and academia as well. Exchanges in all domains are obviously facilitated by a more informed understanding of the polity and society with which we are dealing. But, while policy itself may benefit from a wider pool of expertise and talent, it is equally necessary that the world of China studies also has a sound grasp of policy.
- Historical update: After the 1962 conflict, both exchanged Ambassadors only in 1976. The first Prime Ministerial visit to China after 1954 actually happened only in 1988. And indeed, the re-building of our ties was actually a very painstaking and arduous endeavour. The quality of our ties in many ways was impacted, both by the border conflict and the lost decades thereafter. There is also a strategic explanation to this, given how close China was – in contrast to India - to the West in this period. Nevertheless, for the last three decades, interactions and exchanges grew steadily in many areas. China became one of India's largest trading partners, a very significant source of investment, even of technology, a participant in projects and infrastructure building and a very substantial destination for tourism and education. As for the border areas, a complex but practical set of understandings and agreements focused on their management even as negotiations were conducted on the boundary dispute.
- LAC story: The advancement of ties in this period was clearly predicated on ensuring that peace and tranquillity was not disturbed and that the Line of Actual Control was both observed and respected by both sides. For this reason, it was explicitly agreed that the two countries would refrain from massing troops on their common border. There was also increasing construction of border infrastructure, especially on the Chinese side. Since 2014, there may have been more efforts by India to reduce this very considerable gap, including greater budget commitments and a better road building record. Nevertheless, the infrastructure differential remains significant and, as we saw last year, consequential.
- Fundamentally peaceful: For all the differences and disagreements on the boundary, the central fact was that border areas still remained fundamentally peaceful. The last loss of life before 2020 was, in fact, as far back as 1975. That is why the events in Eastern Ladakh last year have so profoundly disturbed the relationship. Because they not only signalled a disregard for commitments about minimizing troop levels, but also showed a willingness to breach peace and tranquillity.
- Trade angle: Even before 2020, the India-China relationship witnessed decisions and events that reflected the duality of cooperation and competition. Trade grew dramatically, though it’s one-sided nature made it increasingly controversial. In sectors like power and telecom, Chinese companies obtained access to the Indian market. The number of Indian students in China grew, as indeed did Indian tourists who visited there. When it came to interests and aspirations, some of the divergences were also apparent. You may recall the practice of stapled-visas; or the reluctance to deal with some of our military commands. Then there was China’s opposition to India’s membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group and to a permanent seat in the UN Security Council. When it came to trade, promises of market access did not match delivery. The blocking of UN listing of Pakistani terrorists involved in attacks on India had its own resonance. And of course, the violation of Indian sovereignty by the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. Even the border areas saw frictions on some occasions. As the cumulative impact of these developments began to be felt, the two nations agreed at Astana in 2017 not to allow differences to become disputes. At the same time, they also endeavoured to enhance the factors of stability in the relationship. Subsequent Summits were largely in that direction and infact affirmed that very consensus. But far from mitigating differences, the events of 2020 have actually put our relationship under exceptional stress.
- Eight broad propositions.
- First and foremost, agreements already reached must be adhered to in their entirety, both in letter and spirit.
- Second, where the handling of the border areas are concerned, the LAC must be strictly observed and respected; any attempt to unilaterally change the status quo is completely unacceptable.
- Third, peace and tranquillity in the border areas is the basis for development of relations in other domains. If they are disturbed, so inevitably will the rest of the relationship. This is quite apart from the issue of progress in the boundary negotiations.
- Fourth, while both nations are committed to a multi-polar world, there should be a recognition that a multi-polar Asia is one of its essential constituents.
- Fifth, obviously each state will have its own interests, concerns and priorities; but sensitivity to them cannot be one-sided. At the end of the day, relationships between major states are reciprocal in nature.
- Sixth, as rising powers, each will have their own set of aspirations and their pursuit too cannot be ignored.
- Seventh, there will always be divergences and differences but their management is essential to our ties.
- And eighth, civilizational states like India and China must always take the long view.
COMMENTS