By Pravin Sawhney
By PLA’s massive intrusions
in Chumar (Ladakh) which were timed with President Xi Jinping’s three-day India
visit beginning September 17, China managed to humble Prime Minister Narendra
Modi on his home turf.
Modi who appeared
totally in control on the first day in Ahmedabad and had Jinping’s ears for
most of the day, was reasonably subdued in Delhi. Even in the press statements,
Modi, unlike Jinping, flagged the border stand-off right in the beginning,
asking for clarity on the Line of Actual Control (LAC). However, by underplaying
the border issue, Jinping seems to have sent a powerful message to India’s
neighbours about Beijing’s might. The latter will help Beijing get fulsome
support from littoral nations in the Indian Ocean for its ambitious maritime
silk route project, which could, with time, acquire military overtures.
Unfortunately,
this unsaid message got lost on India’s thinking community which cannot
differentiate between the two adversaries, Pakistan and China. Some experts
said that the PLA, like the Pakistan Army, is a state within state and does not
listen to Jinping and its own foreign office; Jinping was seen to have been
embarrassed by his own troops. Others prognosticated that a humiliated Jinping
had committed to resolve the border dispute at an early date. Nothing is
further from the truth.
China,
unlike the western nations, does not view aggression or war as an end of
diplomacy. Aggression for Beijing is less about military and more about
psychological victory; it is an inalienable part of its negotiating style. Moreover,
China does not consider a particular negotiation, whatever its level, as a make
or break event which should either show result or be dubbed failure. Negotiations
are meant to frustrate and stress the opponent till he, at an opportune time,
accepts Chinese viewpoint as his own. This explains why China adopts a
historical and at times deceptive perspective in diplomacy till it suits it to
arrive at a quick favourable conclusion.
When the
Chinese fifth generation leadership under President Jinping came in office in
2012, it was confident of exploiting its enormous economic might garnered by
earlier leaderships to both consolidate its territories and expand its
strategic frontiers. This explains Jinping’s elevation as head of all three
high offices, namely as head of the Politburo Standing Committee, Central
Military Commission and government at the same time. This consolidation was
done to obviate the possibility of more than one power centres in China;
Beijing had clearly decided to assume the leadership role in Asia by taking on
the most powerful nation in the world. During my visit to Beijing in July 2012
at PLA’s invitation, the Chinese military was vocal in naming the United States
as its sole adversary; suggesting by default that it did not consider India worthy
of rivalry.
Against this
backdrop, India should know that let alone resolve the border dispute, or agree
to a LAC, China will not even disclose its perception of the LAC. Why? Because
it helps China nibble Indian territory and also keep India under great
psychological pressure fearing a war where no outside country will come to its
assistance. While India misleads its people on its military preparedness against
China, Beijing understands the hollowness of Delhi’s claims made regularly by
its political and military officers and scientific community.
Of the total
3,488km disputed border, the 1,488km in Ladakh (Jammu and Kashmir) is most
vulnerable and, by Delhi’s own admission, has been transgressed and even
intruded more. This is not coincidental but is a part of Chinese strategy to
encircle India where it is weakest. Unlike Arunachal Pradesh which has the
McMahon Line drawn by the British in 1914, Xinjiang’s (China) border with
Ladakh has historically been an open frontier till 1959, when both India and
China made strong territorial claims.
In an abrupt
development, which Delhi underplayed, China in December 2010 declared that its
border with India was 2,000km and not 3,488km as claimed by India. Beijing had
said that it did not have a border with India in Ladakh, where Indian troops
are locked in a confrontation with the Pakistan Army in the Siachen glacier
since May 1984. With a mere LAC, which by definition is a military line, in
Ladakh, China is now pushing the frontier westwards by denying any advantages
that the Indian forces have, for example, in Chumar-Demchok area.
This should
tell Delhi that the border dispute is not a tactical issue. It is the sole
strategic issue which unless balanced with politico-military efforts will
impede India’s rise. Increased bilateral trade and commerce can surely wait.
No comments:
Post a Comment