Kartik Shuddha Trayodashi, Kaliyug Varsha 5111

On being commissioned in the Army in 1957, one was told that while Pakistan is the short-term threat, it is China which was the longer-term threat. Three wars with Pakistan and one with China and 50 years later, the threat forecast has not changed. China and Pakistan have colluded against India with Beijing providing political, moral and material support to Islamabad. New Delhi not only failed to break this nexus but also its commitment enshrined as a parliamentary resolution to retake every inch of territory lost to China.

China has increased the infrastructure and capability gap with India that existed in 1962 manifold. Beijing has tied Islamabad around Delhi’s neck. China is now India’s greatest (and gravest) challenge is the rating given by the National Security Council. With China we have a border dispute and serious differences over the Dalai Lama and his Government-in-exile in Dharamshala. Also over irregular issuance of visas for residents of Arunachal Pradesh and Jammu & Kashmir and for depicting this State on maps as an independent country and showing Arunachal Pradesh as part of China. Official and independent Chinese comments about India and its aspirations have been rather offensive and its opposition to India’s inclusion in the UN Security Council and the India-US nuclear deal is well known.

Yet, rather incongruously, Delhi showcases its relations with China as a strategic and co-operative partnership. Had we not permitted the hard and soft power gap to become so unbridgeable, China would think twice before bullying India. It was astonishing to listen to Defence Minister AK Antony say recently that “India did not invest in military modernisation in the past”. This is an admission of criminal neglect of national security.

China raised the ante over the recent spat about the Dalai Lama’s coming visit to Tawang which was preceded by a war of words on other issues. On the eve of the Hua Hin meeting last week between Prime Ministers Manmohan Singh and Wen Jiabao, the People’s Daily published a commentary, “Dalai Lama goes further down traitorous road”, in which it accused “the Dalai Lama clique of co-operating closely with India whenever Sino-Indian border negotiations are being held or the Indian side is maliciously speculating over a border dispute”.

During talks on the sidelines of the Asean summit, Mr Singh expressed India’s intent to further strengthen the strategic and co-operative partnership without allowing the border dispute spilling into other areas. Mr Wen Jiabao reiterated his country’s desire for a healthy and steady relationship with India. The next day Mr Singh, while briefing the media about his dinner dialogue with Mr Wen Jiabao, indicated the focus was on two issues: The Dalai Lama and border incursions.

On the Dalai Lama, Mr Singh told Mr Wen Jiabao that he was an honoured guest and a religious figure who was forbidden from indulging in political activities. On the border issue, Mr Singh and Mr Wen Jiabao reaffirmed the stock formulation: “The need to protect peace and tranquillity on the border pending a resolution of the border question.” He clarified that other irritants like Chinese projects in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir and irregular grant of travel visas did not come up. After the briefings, and interaction with Mr Singh the media went to town, claiming “PM tells off Wen” and “India talks tough and gives it back to China”.

It is not India’s diplomatic style to be offensive when dealing with China. Xinhua and China Daily have blamed the Indian media for raising tension. It is largely India’s contention that the border dispute should be insulated from other co-operative activities for fear of opening another front. This is precisely the kind of delinking India has sought to forge between dialogue and cross-border terrorism with Pakistan with eminent failure.

As the border dispute is inextricably linked to Tibet and the Dalai Lama, it will keep resurfacing with the ebb and tide of dialogue, the Dalai Lama’s presence in India, and more significantly, the assertive and sometimes provocative pattern of patrolling adopted by the PLA. Besides the aggressive patrolling on the border, bellicosity in editorial remarks and think-tank comments and sharper focus on Tawang as part of a shriller claim over Arunachal Pradesh which it calls ‘South Tibet’, China has shifted its stance over Jammu & Kashmir from one of neutrality to being pro-Pakistan.

The border infrastructure and connectivity of PLA posts and bases have improved substantially in all border regions and not specifically targeting India. Defence experts argue that the PLA is out to provoke a limited border skirmish to seize Tawang which it regards as politically and strategically vital for the religious and security gridlock of Tibet. China’s most famous academic on South Asia, Prof Wang Dehua from the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences says that “we have evidence to show Tawang belonged to China” and suggests trading Tawang and Aksai Chin for the rest of Arunachal Pradesh.

Since 2005, a border settlement has been attempted between the Special Representatives of the two countries based on ‘Political Parameters and Guidelines’ after abandoning the exercise in map-marking for a definition of the Line of Actual Control. As the Chinese realised that the principle of “actual control” would be disadvantageous to them in the eastern sector, they opted to explore a political solution.

Here too, they have run into a cul de sac of not disturbing settled population centres. China should be persuaded to revert to map-marking and defining its perception of the LAC. It is high time the two sides stopped hedging difficult issues, especially over Pakistan, and set a time-line for the boundary question. There is profound misunderstanding and spread of disinformation from independent and Government-controlled media. Track II wallahs have not helped either. Starting the dormant people-to-people contact will require imagination and resources.

The China Study Group, which is the highest policy-making body, requires new blood to reduce inbreeding. Self-censorship in the media and timely official rebuttals will ensure unintended signals are not sent across the LAC. Perceptions about China’s signals and messages have to be deciphered into a realistic evaluation of its real intent.

We should not be intimidated by the daunting military and economic disparity. Rather it should encourage a focussed military and infrastructure modernisation in bridging the gap. The hotline between two Prime Ministers, when operational, must be put to use. Making this relationship work in conditions of strategic rivalry is the challenge

Source: www.dailypioneer.com

Also See

	Hang terrorist Mohd Afzal Mohammad Afzal.is a Kashmiri terrorist who attacked parliament in 2000. Supreme court has given death sentence but congress is protecting this anti-Indian. Read more
	India map controversy CIA, CNN and BBC of UK have depicted a distorted version of the map of India. They deliberately portray the Indian state of Kashmir as a part of Pakistan and China. Read more