Speaking in a meeting on 28th August,2020, India’s External Affairs Minister has said that “realism should shape India’s China policy”. He further said that India’s China policy will be “critical to India’s prospects” and will require “going beyond traditional assumptions.”
One really would not understand what the External Affairs Minister means by this statement, which obviously lacks clarity. When every Indian is wondering how India would tackle China’s aggressive postures, the utterances of the India’s External Affairs Minister gives an impression of his indulging in academic exercise in a debating forum. Probably, one can understand if a professor or a retired diplomat would make such a statement, which would be read as a statement of no consequence and would simply be noted as the viewpoint of a thinker and an intellectual. Should the External Affairs Minister sound like an academician ?
What is conspicuous about the speech of the External Affairs Minister is that he has not condemned China clearly for it’s aggression against India. Obviously, he wants to make a soft speech that would not hurt China. Would such an approach of the External Affairs Minister help India’s cause in dealing with aggressive China ?
In the past, China has not concealed it’s intentions to belittle India at every opportunity. It claims India’s province Arunachal Pradesh as it’s own. It is holding thousands of kilometres of Indian territory that it occupied after 1962 war. China gleefully accepted the disputed land in Kashmir from Pakistan ( which increasingly appears to be a subordinate nation to China) and is constructing it’s projects in the Kashmir region that Pakistan gifted away. Repeatedly, China blocked India’s attempts to condemn the dreaded terrorist in the United Nations. Above all, China recently entered into a war with India in the month of May, 2020, when 20 Indian soldiers were killed by Chinese army.
In such circumstances, when the External Affairs Minister has said that “realism should shape India’s China policy”, one cannot but think that it was the similar policy adopted by the former Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru , when he refrained from protesting when China occupied Tibet and massacred large number of Tibetan protesters.
One gets the impression that for the last several decades , China has been taking India for granted and has never considered India as an honourable neighbouring country whose sentiment should be respected.
After the recent attack by China in the month of May, there has been expectation in India that the present Indian government would do everything possible to ensure that China would give up it’s anti India posture. Certainly, appeasing China or adopting soft policy towards China will not make China behave better.
Of course, India has taken some steps recently to restrict China’s investment and trade in India but this appears to be more of a cosmetic strategy , since it will not have any significant adverse impact on China’s large economy. Indian government has also taken measures to strengthen Indian military ,expecting that India may have to face war at two fronts against Pakistan and China at the same time , as both these countries share common enmity and hatred towards India.
What is particularly noteworthy is the fact that India has not condemned China’s actions in Hong Kong, where it is severely suppressing the freedom movement. China is threatening Taiwan all the time and India has not expressed it’s concern about this. China’s aggression in the South China Sea is watched by India silently.
China’s occupation of Tibet for several decades now has not been directly or indirectly challenged by India so far. On the other hand, India seems to be taking excessive care not to displease China, by not openly recognizing His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s role as an apostle of peace. It is shocking that the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who is known to be very communicative, has not cared to greet His Holiness the Dalai Lama on his birthday this year.
One wonders whether India’ External Affairs Minister wants to buy peace with China at any cost. His cautious statement that “realism should shape India’s China policy” makes one suspect that he believes that peace should be bought with China by appeasement.
Until China mend it’s ways and give up it’s aggressive postures , India has to necessarily oppose China in every forum. This is the only language that China can understand.
Several countries in the world are now realizing the need to contain China and defeat it’s expansionist ambitions. As a country sharing a border with China , India is a victim of China’s aggression. Perhaps, one country which has suffered more than India due to China’s ruthless policies and conduct is Tibet.
One cannot but wonder as to why India hesitates to reverse it’s earlier counterproductive policy of approving China’s occupation of Tibet and voice it’s concern about the present plight of Tibet and stress the need for Tibet liberation. The voice of India will be heard in the world and China cannot but take note of it.
What has got India to fear about China, when China has already done the worst damage to India’s cause in several ways? There is no need for India to be afraid about China’s military strength and in the unfortunate event of such war taking place, it certainly would not be a one sided affair and the world cannot afford to see China overwhelming India in the military confrontation.
India’s China policy as indicated by India’s External Affairs Minister is causing confusion and uncertainty about India’s determination to stand up to aggressive China. The speech of the India’s External Affairs Minister reinforces this confusion.
Soft pedalling China issue by India will only please China and none else. It is not in India’s interest. It is not in the interest of world peace also, as it is now clearly evident that China’s expansionist ambitions is a clear threat to world peace.(N. S. Venkataraman is a trustee with the "Nandini Voice for the Deprived," a not-for-profit organization that aims to highlight the problems of downtrodden and deprived people and support their cause. To promote probity and ethical values in private and public life and to deliberate on socio-economic issues in a dispassionate and objective manner.)
Comment here !
Two global struggles – Cold War II and the fight against climate change – are colliding. By agreeing to hold
“The taxation system has tilted toward the rich, and away from the middle class, in the last ten years. It
Climate change is the ultimate test of whether it is possible for countries both to compete for global dominance and
Prices of fossil fuels increased sharply in October. European prices for natural gas hit a record peak. Prices for thermal