may 23, 2015

A World to Win
Can India and China deliver a new future to the 21st century?

rime Minister Narendra Modi has made it a habit to hype

up his foreign visits and embellish them with all the bells
and whistles of a public relations campaign. His recent
visit to China (and thence to Mongolia and South Korea) was no
different. Expectations were raised high, much was made of the
fact that the Chinese President Xi Jinping was breaking protocol
to receive Modi in Xian, and the word historic was used liberally to describe the visit and each of its events.
Given such theatrics, it was unsurprising that for much of the
three days that Modi spent in China, national attention seemed to
be fixated on his photographs among Xians terracotta army and
on his churlish speech to non-resident Indians in Shanghai. Modis
own spinmeisters flooded the mainstream and social media with
news of the deals worth $22 billion that had been signed between
Indian and Chinese companies and by the straight talk that our
Prime Minister had done with the Chinese on strategic matters.
There was forward movement in some of the areas. The Prime
Ministers initiative to foreground people to people relations and
the Government of Indias unilateral decision to simplify visas to
Chinese nationals were both positive steps on Indias part. There
is now a visible, and growing, Indian community in China and it
is welcome if more Chinese citizens come to India for tourism as
well as work. It was also a welcome move for both governments to
announce their intention to work together on multilateral issues
like climate change and trade. The business deals which were
signed will also help grow IndiaChina trade, though one really
does not know how much of the promised investment will finally
materialise, or what effect it will have on the large, and growing,
trade deficit India runs with her northern neighbour.
However, there is nothing historic or even a breakthrough
in any of these decisions. It does not help diplomatic relations,
particularly one so layered and vexed, to be wrung through the
disappointment of exaggerated expectations. Prime Minister Modis
unfortunate habit of hyperbole and of turning everything into a
spectacle may merely be an irritant today, but has the risk of turning into a diplomatic nightmare too. For the moment, given the
glacial pace at which relations between India and China have
moved forward after the freeze of 1962, these steps are not without significance and build on last years visit to India by President Xi.
Yet the elephant in the room where the tiger and the dragon
negotiate is their shared border in the Himalayas. There has
Economic & Political Weekly

EPW

may 23, 2015

vol l no 21

been little progress on that over the past year in spite of the two
bilateral visits. Both sides have reiterated their old positions and
despite protestations to the contrary, have allowed stubbornness
rule over pragmatism or (god forbid) generosity. Both India and
China have allowed national chauvinist myths to obstruct a cordial
and mutually agreeable solution to the border left behind by
colonialism. If India has decided that the military limits of the
colonial empire it inherited are the same as the actual ancient territory of its nation, China has deluded itself into assuming that
it has inherited the mandate to the Middle Kingdom of earth.
To appreciate the proportion of the tragedy that the 1962
war represented, we need to remember that India was the first
country, outside of the socialist states, to recognise the Peoples
Republic of China; we need to remember that Panchsheel
represented one of the greatest innovations in international
relations in a world riven by imperial wars and national vanities;
we need to remember the promise of liberation and emancipation that independent India and liberated China represented
in the 1940s and early 1950s. It is only such a comparison
which can illustrate how severe have been the consequences of
Jawaharlal Nehrus and Mao Zedongs inability to overcome
the latent national chauvinisms in their nation-states and
their failure to actualise the radical and liberatory potential
that Panchsheel represented.
There are no major geopolitical or economic reasons for the
IndiaChina military rivalry; they do not compete for markets
or for investments, beyond the general competition which
marks all the players of the global economy. Chinas rise has not
been at Indias expense and Indias recent economic growth has
not cut into Chinas global spread. The disputed border areas
are also not crucial to either economy, whether as a source of
resources or as a market. In fact, much can be gained for both if
the border is settled and the Himalayas largely demilitarised. The
Himalayas and the associated mountain rangescollectively
known as the third poleare the source of water to rivers
which sustain both countries and these are under severe threat
from global warming and local pollution. They are also being
tapped, often without paying attention to environmental or
safety concerns, for hydroelectricity. There is no reason why a
settled peaceful border cannot help both countries address the
issues of melting glaciers and harnessing hydroelectricity better.
7

EDITORIALS

The intractability of the border dispute is perhaps a result of

it being a pure ideological problem with little economic foundation. China faces no military threat from India and India
gains nothing from getting pushed into a Great Game rivalry
with China. The peace dividend from a settlement of the border dispute is massive. Not only will it free substantial amounts
of resources, both military and economic, from a pointless confrontation, it will give both countries more political space to

resolve the Kashmir and Tibet problems; it will defuse many

hot-spots from the Strait of Hormuz to the Straits of Malacca; it
has the potential to even neutralise much of the United Statescobbled strategic alliances in South, Southeast and East Asia.
What the great liberatorsNehru and Maocould not
achieve, can our wannabe statesmen deliver? While their
present actions hold no great hope, we look forward to History
for its surprises.

may 23, 2015

vol l no 21

EPW

Economic & Political Weekly