Skip to main content
Contradictory Tendencies in the India-China Relationship: Does it help the bilateral relationship?

In the last one year, India and China have had a contradictory relationship. And in more ways than one, what happened in the last one year epitomises the future of the relationship between the two countries. On the one hand, trade and investment figures are touching a new high each year, bilateral visits and interactions at multiple levels have increased manifold, trust on each other’s activities and intentions in multilateral forums is at a never seen before high. At the same time, bilaterally, there has been a gradual downswing since for the first time the Chinese Ambassador to India claimed Arunachal Pradesh as part of China in late 2006. Add to it the list of cross border intrusions by the Chinese forces, the media outcry in India over the intrusions, the role of Chinese media over the Dalai Lama and Chinese media’s ignorance about the nature of Indian media, the picture becomes as grim as it could get.
The argument here is that this could be a good thing to push for greater bilateral engagement despite the prevailing contradictions for the future of India China relations for various reasons. First, decoupling from the past of the bilateral relationship is one urgent requirement as far as India China relations are concerned if one seeks an imagined and possible future. It is in the sense that there is a need to move beyond accusing Nehru’s idealism regarding Mao’s China or the contested history of 1962 in order to form a strong basis for the future normalisation of the relationship. As long as one keeps looking at the historical events as the cause of the present state of affairs, one is likely to fail in gauging and planning for the future course of India China relations. Contradictory trends necessarily force one to adopt a perspective that is essentially different from idealism based or civilisational determinism; thus making it more grounded in realism as well as forward looking.
 Second, the contradiction creates the rationale for greater engagement exactly like it has done in the case of US China relations. There are a lot of similarities here. US and China have completely different views over many issues including Taiwan, Tibet, Human Rights, Democracy, and in the recent past over Xinjiang, Environment, Trade Practices and so on. However, this did not stop them from greater engagement and from benefiting out of each other’s capabilities. And even when voices continued to be raised over these issues, it did not bother the US in getting cost effective business out of a communist non democratic state. For its part, China did not mind accepting investments from a neo-imperial power. In short, neither was apologetic about the contradictions and after three decades of engagement, one sees the theory of complex interdependence in action, which is at its peak at the moment. Similarly, India and China will have to learn to live with the contractions they face and engage because they face all these contradictions. Thus, the contradictions will and should create raison d'etre for the deeper and neutral understanding of each other.
Third, contradictions will be the defining feature of the future of the bilateral relations between India and China. India will rise to a power status in the international order and China would like to avoid having India competing for strategic space in any field. At the same time both have much to gain from each others’ economic experiences. Besides their obvious rise and competitiveness over shared strategic space there are other compelling reasons why both will not be able to ignore each other. India’s democratic experience will be the biggest attraction for the Chinese people and worry for its leadership and Chinese growth rates will be equally attractive for India. This is perhaps the biggest contradiction. Even then, despite the contradictions, undertaking policies aimed at engagement is the best possible way foward.
Fourth, India has more to benefit by managing the contradictory relationship as by this process, it will create a stake in the Indian growth story for the Chinese entrepreneurs which could then in turn compel the leadership to relook at some of its other policies in the South Asian region; China-Pakistan relations for example could take different shape if Chinese perceptions on the India story changed with its engagement with India. However, this is going to be a necessarily long term process.
The first step towards creating engagement amidst contradictory interests would be about managing the trust deficit and then reducing it gradually over a period of time. Over the period of time, India can try and create bridges between the economic and political aspects of the relations, between the bilateral and regional and also between bilateral and multilateral issues. Thus, India can take the contradictions in its stride and design a forward looking China policy.

THIS POST HAS BEEN PUBLISHED ON THE IDSA WEBSITE AS WEB COMMENT

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Singapore Summit and China’s Strategic Assumptions in East Asia

Thus it appears as if after pulling out a credible Iran deal, one which has enough checks and balances as well as involvement of other like-minded countries, The US President   Donald Trump gave away a lot in Singapore in return little verifiable in return from Kim. It appears as if North Korea, a de-facto nuclear power, is the bigger winner out of the Singapore summit. Donald Trump did have his moment of unilateral glory in Singapore but if Japan and South Korea came out on top, then they would have more reasons to worry. Moreover, China’s headaches would rise were they to act on those worries. Until the Singapore summit, Donald Trump and Kim Jong un had fairly same reasons for direct talks. For Trump it was his desire to stamp the American supremacy. He sought to show China its place, after years of engagement policy by Obama by first completely discrediting the Six Party talks which were not only China-initiated but also China-led. He used social media on one...

ग्रंथविश्व : पर्यावरणवादाच्या ‘बायबल’ची पन्नाशी महत्त्वाची कशी?

‘सायलेंट स्प्रिंग’ या रॅशेल कार्सन यांनी लिहिलेल्या पुस्तकाची पहिली आवृत्ती अमेरिकेत २७ सप्टेंबर १९६२ रोजी प्रकाशित झाली. म्हणजे आता या पुस्तकाला ५० वर्षे पूर्ण झाली आहेत. गेल्या अर्धशतकात या पुस्तकाचे अनेक भाषांमधील अनुवाद प्रसिद्ध झाले, इंग्रजीत तर अनेकानेक आवृत्त्याही निघाल्या. त्याहीपेक्षा महत्त्वाचे म्हणजे, ‘सायलेंट स्प्रिंग’मध्ये मांडलेल्या संकल्पनांवर आणि त्यामागल्या तत्त्वज्ञानावर आधारलेली अनेक पुस्तके पुढल्या काळात लिहिली गेली. आजच्या लोकसत्तेत प्रकाशित लेख . याची मूळ इंग्लिश आवृत्ति लवकरच ब्लॉग वर टाकेन! My article in today's Marathi paper Loksatta. It is on the 50th anniversary of Rachel Carson's seminal book Silent Spring. I will publish the English version of this article on this blog asap!
Having known south Mumbai in minute details and knowing this area well, having walked around extensively to be at the Gateway to inhale a sense of freedom that the air in this part of country gives, I, a diehard Mumbaikar, am particularly disturbed by the war that these terrorists have waged on my city and my country. I just keep getting the feeling all through these times that I am in deep sleep and this is one of those nightmares I will forget after waking up. I wish. The pain of the victims’ families and the destruction are heartbreaking but what bothers me more is the shallowness expressed by some of our citizen, who are famous for being famous, in this hour of serious contemplation. I am talking of the Suhel Seth phenomena. He was loud and clear in his criticism not just of the terrorists but also equally of government mechanism and apparatus. The problem I have in this is not just that his criticism of the system in the situation is unfair, but he was jumping the guns too early....