China’s Foreign Policy: Biang Biang Noodles! by Lt Gen Prakash Katoch in IDR
Are we to blindly
follow Nehru’s legacy of “not a blade of grass grows there” with reference to
Aksai Chin?
The situation today
has not changed, in that, pragmatic recommendations for dealing firmly with
China are being brushed under the carpet as ranting by ‘China bashers’. Same was
the case in building public opinion for withdrawing from Siachen on grounds it
had no strategic significance – now acknowledged otherwise. Similarly, some
military veterans and scholars were roped in to portray India’s shameful
response to China’s intrusion in Daulat Beg Oldi (DBO) into some sort of
diplomatic victory, some even saying that the Chinese intrusion was because of
‘forward’ movements of the Indian Army, knowing full well that Indian Army
unlike Pakistani Army will not move an inch forward without political
approval.
It is only after
public pressure for past few weeks that AK Anthony ventured to give a statement
on 12 May 2013 (first statement as Defence Minister 42 days after the Chinese
intrusion of 15 April) that India has the right to develop infrastructure on own
side. But the question remains as to what is ‘own side’ and have we exchanged
the claim lines with China? The answer appears to be no, as per an article by a
recently superannuated former Chief of Staff of Eastern Command. What then has
been the purpose of the numerous meetings on the border issue over the
years?
The statement by
Sushil Shinde that India has no jurisdiction over the area of Chinese intrusion
is ominous. Strategic importance apart, we don’t seem to have any inkling about
something known as ‘resources’ over which conflicts are likely to rage in
future. Are we to blindly follow Nehru’s legacy of “not a blade of grass grows
there” with reference to Aksai Chin.
Take Siachen; India constitutes 17 percent
of world population but has access to only four percent of global fresh water
reserves. Musharraf as a Lieutenant General (much before he became Chief) gave a
presentation to Pakistani Defence Ministry stating that at the time of
Independence, per capita availability of water in Pakistan was 6000 cusecs which
had already come down to 1000 cusecs per head. He strongly advocated that
Pakistan must capture Kashmir to meet future requirements of water, besides
other reasons. China occupied Shaksgam Valley because of its glaciated fresh
water reserves. Yet we are talking of vacating one of our largest fresh water
reserve in Siachen despite India heading towards being a water starved nation
and China already deploying water weapons by damming rivers flowing into
India.
Former ambassador P
Stopden (who hails from Ladakh) said on national TV post the Chinese DBO
intrusion that over the years India has ceded to China over 400 square
kilometres of territory in Ladakh alone.
Both Aksai Chin and
Ladakh are known to have large uranium and mineral reserves though no mining has
been undertaken. Yet we are gradually ceding to Chinese intrusions. Former
ambassador P Stopden (who hails from Ladakh) said on national TV post the
Chinese DBO intrusion that over the years India has ceded to China over 400
square kilometres of territory in Ladakh alone. This is not counting Chinese
illegal occupation of Aksai Chin (38,000 square kilometres) and Shaksgam Valley
(5,800 square kilometres). He would not make such statement without basis. The
implications are therefore clear – there have been many intrusions in the past
that have been hushed up, as would have been done in the recent one in DBO
(acknowledged officially as 19 kilometre deep but actually 30 kilometres) had
not an enterprising journalist spilled the beans.
If we have actually
ceded some 400 square kilometres of territory in Ladakh, it would not be
surprising if similar has been the case in the central sector and northeast. The
recent Chinese intrusion at DBO would give them another 275 square kilometres
and it is not known whether they came down from KK Pass or Aksai Chin. Times of
India of 4th May states that surveillance imagery captured by spy drones showed
the PLA made three simultaneous intrusions in the adjoining areas of the DBO
sector in mid April this year. But there is silence whether the Chinese continue
to sit at these three locations or have gone back. A linked serious question is
that when the DBO Sector was earlier held by Ladakh Scouts and controlled by the
Army, when, why and on whose order was this sector allotted to the ITBP and
given command channels through the ITBP chain. Was this deliberate to facilitate
Chinese intrusion, firming in, and to eventually turn the flanks of Indian
defences at Siachen, concurrently facilitating handshake between Chinese sitting
in Gilgit-Baltistan with Aksai Chin. This actually amounts to silent war crime
and the government must come out clean.
If we have been
acquiescing to Chinese intrusions deliberately and the army not responding
because of political gagging, this may yet turnout to be the mother of all scams
paling all the gates (Coalgate, Railgate etc) and scores of scams including 2G,
if investigated.
The government says
there is no deal with China in exchange to withdrawing their intrusion from DBO.
Are we expected to actually believe this? If there is no deal, then why have we
agreed to simultaneously withdraw from an area which is 30 kilometres
(officially 19 kilometres) inside our territory? Why have we agreed to demolish
our fortifications from Chumar and why are we referring to these fortifications
as “tin sheds”? if this is not a deal, what is?
What he left unsaid is
that China can tie you up in knots in a manner similar to these noodles that may
defy your spoon and fork but can be handled deftly by China holding the
chopsticks.
Ironically, even
former ambassadors and diplomats are questioning why Salman Khurshid went
running to Beijing to tie up the visit of Li Keqiang whereas protocol demanded
that the Chinese Foreign Minister should have come to India to tie up to the
visit of his Prime Minister. In hindsight, government may claim that Salman’s
visit was independent of Li Keqiang’s fortcoming visit to India but the facts,
in sync with our current policy of bending backwards, are quite apparent. It is
obvious that Chinese would have been pleaded to for Li Keqiang making the right
noises in India to strengthen government’s hand in forthcoming elections. The
Chinese would have readily agreed in exchange to more concessions, that would
have been quietly accepted by the Indian side. The public can continue to be
kept at bay under the cover of ambiguity of ‘their perceptions of LAC’ and
Shinde can be banked upon for more statements of ‘no jurisdiction’ as
backup.
At an international
seminar on Asia Pacific held at the United Services Institution of India in
November 2011, a spokesman from the Chinese Foreign Ministry described China’s
foreign policy as “Biang Biang Noodles”; a Chinese delicacy loved by all. What
he left unsaid is that China can tie you up in knots in a manner similar to
these noodles that may defy your spoon and fork but can be handled deftly by
China holding the chopsticks.
China has been propagating to the world that it
does not accept the Mcdonald-McCarteney Line but the fact is that China’s
Representative (read Ambassador of those days) not only affixed his full
signatures agreeing to this line on the map during the Simla Convention of 1914
but acknowledged Tibet as a separate country since he put his signatures
alongside the Representatives of Tibet and British India – see map below
(details available in Atlas of The Northern Frontiers of India with our Ministry
of External Affairs):
If China
refuses to acknowledge the above map and signatures of its own Ambassador (read
Representative), did it expect that the Chinese Premier should have signed such
a map? It would not be surprising if China executed her ambassador for signing
the map but what is certain that China has habitually gone back on its word and
made preposterous claims, as in South China Sea, East China Sea, Tibet and
against India. This pattern of deceit was very well foreseen by Sardar Patel who
forewarned Nehru but that is another story.
Noteworthy is that it is only in
2006, that China expanded her claim from Tawang to entire Arunachal Pradesh.
China’s claim to Tawang was also on the plea that residents from Tibet come to
Tawang monastery to pay obeisance. That is some strange logic but if this logic
is to be accepted then what stops India claiming the sacred Mansarover region
where thousands of Indians go for pilgrimage annually organized by Government of
India?
The recent Chinese
intrusion in DBO was to put India inexorably on the back foot, in which it has
succeeded despite it being done in gross violation of the 2005 India-China
Agreement on Strategic and Cooperative Partnership for Peace and Prosperity that
included maintaining peace and tranquility on the border. The obvious intent
also is to push India into a boundary settlement in China’s favour, India having
dithered woefully in even developing its border infrastructure with a petrified
hierarchy that is alien to both future resources and strategic
advantage.
Noteworthy is that it
is only in 2006, that China expanded her claim from Tawang to entire Arunachal
Pradesh.
Significantly, in
2005, a Deputy Political Commissar of PLAAF had said, “When a nation grows
strong enough, it practices hegemony. The sole purpose of power is to pursue
power …… Geography is destiny ….. When a country begins to rise, it shall first
set itself in invincible position”. But the question here is that has China
really reached that “invincible position” having nuclearised Pakistan and North
Korea while antagonizing bulk of the world? This perceived invincibility must be
viewed in the backdrop of China having too many fault lines that the world may
just choose to exploit to desist China from practicing her “Tian Xia Concept”
that views “all territories” under the skies (Heaven) as belonging to the
Chinese. Chinese economy is linked to the world economy – holding more than a
trillion dollars of US debt is just one example. Questions about China’s
economic invincibility are already cropping up with growth having gone down to
7.6 percent (three year low) in the second half of 2012.
Analysts suspect
economic growth this year will fall between 7.5% and 8.0%, but corruption and
policy issues bring it down to 7.0%. Rapid economic growth has developed a whole
series of bubbles whose future is unpredictable. The question being asked is
whether the Chinese economy is on the brink of decline. China needs Indian
markets.
It is time China
realizes that she is hindering her own dreams of consolidating in the Indian
Ocean Region by following a policy of confrontation with India no matter how
sugar coated. How much this aggression can push India into the US Asia Pivot and
with what consequences to China is a matter of conjecture but something that
Chinese policy makers need to examine. Her supporting and meddling with
insurgencies within India bares her actual intentions and it is time for India
to do some plain talking with China including Pakistan’s terror factory and
China’s tacit support to Pakistan’s anti-India jihad.
A boundary
settlement proposal is reported to have been proffered by China during Salman
Khurshid’s visit to Beijing, details of which have not been released to the
media. This should have actually been done or debated in public or at least
discussed in Parliament or in an All Party Meet. However, the federal structure
of the country having evaporated and with talks of even clipping the wings of
the judiciary, that is unlikely to happen.
This perceived
invincibility must be viewed in the backdrop of China having too many fault
lines that the world may just choose to exploit to desist China from practicing
her “Tian Xia Concept” that views “all territories” under the skies (Heaven) as
belonging to the Chinese.
Nevertheless, what
India must realize is that China with her extended hegemonic claims wants to
settle once for all the question of Tibet by settling the border with India. It
sees itself at an advantageous position having developed infrastructure in
border areas. But she actually fears enhanced Indian military capability with
infrastructure development being attempted on the Indian side and knows our army
has no problems in giving a bloody nose to an aggressor at any point along the
LAC, fears of hierarchy including cyber and nuclear attacks notwithstanding.
We
must realize that it is not China but India that is in a position of strength
though the psychologically weak may consider otherwise. The Tibet Card must
remain open till China agrees to a ‘One India’ policy with J&K as Indian
Territory. Shaksgam must be part of the discussion and our LAC claims must be
projected strongly. If Tawang is being claimed by China on ‘religious
pilgrimage’ grounds, then we should set forth our claim to the Mansarovar region
including the approach to it.
On no account should we agree to stop patrolling
and developing infrastructure up to what we perceive as the LAC. Most likely,
this is part of the proposal by China and the very reason why the government is
shy of sharing it with the media or other political parties.
There is absolutely
no doubt that Li Keqiang and his entourage will make noises ‘what Indians will
like to hear’. It has happened earlier with Chinese visitors (copied by
Pakistanis) but actions on ground have been exact opposite. The biggest
disservice that the government can do to the nation is to agree to stop
patrolling and developing infrastructure up to what we perceive as the LAC
(freezing development and enlarging our military capability before the final
boundary settlement should simply be out of the question),
and signing an
overall agreement with China underhand; implying without any political / public
debate and then put the spin doctors to work to morph public opinion under garb
of ambiguity. To quote Tavleen again from her book ‘Durbar’, she writes thus
about government manipulating the media, “In insidious form of bribery, they are
offered not just access to leaders and junkets when such leaders travel abroad,
but nominated seats in Rajya Sabha. Subsidized housing and all sorts of other
perks that are usually available only to politicians and high ranking government
officials”. We saw this in action in recent months.
Li Keqiang’s visit
is litmus test for the Indian resolve and the government must ensure it does not
fail the billion plus Indians. It will be better for credibility to take the
nation into confidence both before and after Le Keqiang’s visit. Any shady deals
are unlikely to remain secret no matter what the veils of secrecy. Can the
government for a change desist from media manipulation and more importantly,
nation fixing?
No comments:
Post a Comment