[ad_1]
It is now clear that this framework must be discarded. What is less clear, however, is the new intellectual framework that must be adopted from the Indian perspective. The enumeration of policy choices, the development of a strategic perspective, and a carefully considered strategic framework, is the need of the hour in India, according to a paper published by emerging think-tank the Pune International Centre or PIC.
“While China often claims that it will never seek hegemony, Xi Jinping’s own words (at the Party Congress in October 2017) were, “a military is built to fight.” The Chinese are systematically undertaking military modernisation in the context of an aggressive foreign policy,” claimed the PIC paper authored by Gautam Bambawale, India’s former envoy to China, among others.
Other authors of the report are Dr Vijay Kelkar (Vice President, PIC), Dr Raghunath Mashelkar (President, PIC), Dr Ganesh Natarajan, Dr Ajit Ranade and Prof. Ajay Shah. The paper was sent by Pune International Centre to Prime Minister Narendra Modi and other senior members of the government last week.
The authors are of the view that India’s China stance has to irreversibly change, in light of recent developments, both bilateral and global. The earlier strategy is simply not tenable in the light of an increasingly confrontational, if not hostile neighbour.
The paper sketches elements of a strategy which coheres and unifies, rather than compartmentalises economic, diplomatic and geopolitical aspects of the relationship. It recognizes the need to build strong coalitions with partners who have aligned objectives. In the longer term, a domestic economy energised by strategic patience and high sustainable growth is the appropriate new framework. Coalitions, calm confrontation, and industry growth in areas where we can build a competitive advantage and become an alternate supply chain to China is the recommended new China strategy.
“By moving several Divisions of PLA troops to eastern Ladakh in the summer of 2020 along with armor and artillery and attempting to move their ground positions up to what the Chinese consider their Line of Actual Control (LAC) at several different points, China attempted to define the LAC unilaterally. They were also demonstrating that they were the pre-eminent power in Asia and they could do as they pleased, particularly as their comprehensive national power was several times larger. They were exhibiting their contempt and disdain for India both tactically as well as strategically. They were saying to India, Asia and the world at large, that the 21st Century is a Chinese Century.”
“By taking military action in 2020, China has clearly indicated that she does not desire a stable, balanced, forward looking relationship with India and that she is willing to use military coercion to resolve her disputes with India. All earlier bilateral agreements aimed at maintaining peace and tranquility in the India – China border areas have been violated by China. China has decided the nature of the future India – China relationship: she appears to desire a conflictual, unbalanced and tense relationship with India.
India cannot but recognize these signals and react accordingly,” the paper noted.
“India does not desire a conflictual, unbalanced and tense relationship with China. The military message that India has sent China is that it will not accept this bullying and attempts at coercion, lying down. India has shown the spirit of fighting back. The India – China relationship is predicated on peace on disputed borders. If and only if there is tranquility on the border, then the rest of the relationship can potentially move ahead as it has done over the past three decades. Therefore, India will have to reset its China policy. It cannot be business as usual. This is a time for a fundamental rethink of the India-China relationship.
The study notes that in recent years, China has dismantled this arrangement and established a more hostile stance towards India with simmering military conflict.
When the conflict became kinetic in Doklam and then in Ladakh, the immediate impulse was of course about mobilising troops. There was an outcry in the press, nationalistic fervour, and emotional boycotts of Chinese goods.
The study says that it is important to see these problems on a larger scale, in terms of space, time and force. It is not just about a few weeks in Ladakh involving a few thousand troops. There is much more at play. If India merely responds with troop movements and winter gear, this may set the stage for future reverses, it said.
At present, India is in a weak position when compared to China. The study says whether GDP, state capacity, the capabilities of the best firms, the extent of internationalisation, the mastery of science and technology or the quality of the top intellectuals — at present, China is significantly ahead of India.
This superiority can be used by China to put pressure on India in many ways. Some examples of this include a sheer display of military strength to grab land at the border, the use of a variety of levers to foster friction for India with neighbouring countries, and nudging decision making at international organisations in ways that hinder India’s interests.
Looking into the future, if the gap between Chinese and Indian economic growth rates continues, these problems will be amplified.
As per the study, in the short run, Indian diplomacy faces a new situation. Never before has India faced a hostile nation with significantly superior strength. China in 1962 was at roughly Indian levels of GDP; Pakistan is a smaller country. This is the first time that India has hostilities with a substantially stronger nation. Confronting China alone would be unwise. It is essential to build coalitions, the study said.
India needs to embark on a process of building deep ties with about 20 countries. The genuine depth of these relationships requires linkages in trade, finance, investment, education, travel, migration and shared values. India will need to modify domestic policy positions in ways that suit the interests and values of these partners.
In the short run, there is debate over the protectionist measures that will harm Chinese exports or investment in India. A significant proportion of those moves are self-defeating in that they harm India more than they harm China, the study adds.
There is a case for three groups of restrictions: Limit companies controlled by the Chinese state from a controlling stake in a hotlist of sensitive infrastructure assets; steering clear of Chinese-controlled technological standards; and blocking surveillance of Indian persons.
“The judicious use of self-reliance (Aatmanirbhar) grounded in self-confidence (Atmavishwas), where a confident India engages with the world without insecurity, forms alliances with like-minded countries, and leverages democracy and a skilled workforce to good effect, is the path through which the China challenge can be addressed,” the report said.
[ad_2]
Source link
