Foreign interlocutors stationed in or visiting India’s capital may have been a little too courageous in addressing the ill-treatment of China, India’s main strategic challenger. These statements are not only a repetition of facts that have become difficult to ignore in recent years, but are also a testament to the effectiveness of Indian diplomacy.
The newly-arrived German envoy in Delhi took a clear stand when he said that Chinese claims on Arunachal Pradesh were “outrageous” and “border violations … should not be accepted.”
A few days ago, former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said in an interview to The Hindu that in his view the Chinese, after the April-May 2020 LAC clashes, “rather than withdrawing strategically” was chosen for. , that “there was every evidence that China had consolidated”.
References to Rudd are rarely complete without highlighting his China expertise—his ability to speak Mandarin—and his time as a diplomat in Beijing. Therefore, it is noteworthy that, he says, “in terms of the concrete, political and diplomatic message from China, they are sending a clear message that China is not one to back down”. Sharing the stage with Rudd, just a day after the inaugural interview of the Asia Society Policy Institute office in New Delhi, the Indian Foreign Minister, S Jaishankar, is an occasion to ask what foreign views on Chinese policy towards India are India’s own towards China. What about policies?
One, Jaishankar’s declaration that “sovereignty and territorial integrity have to be respected”, is certainly an indirect acknowledgment of the fact that the Chinese have been sitting on the acquired territory since 2020. Then the question is, what stops the Indian government from saying so openly? Is firing off the shoulders of foreign diplomats a sustainable strategy? And what cost may New Delhi pay as a result?
Second, India’s persistence with talks with China despite snow-capped or no progress could be part of Rudd’s ability to “find off-ramp” Indian diplomacy. However, as he also points out, evidence-up from Chinese infrastructure and military build-up suggests Beijing is not going to give up the gains made in 2020, where talks are actually progressing or the German envoy’s use of the phrase. To, how is India not accepting border violations?
Three more concerned, while Rudd saw “a clear analogy” between China’s actions on the LAC and its actions in the South China Sea, Taiwan and the East China Sea, and the German envoy saw some similarities with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Indian government Myself has been reluctant to make such comparisons. If this is the view, how can New Delhi be an effective—or conscientious—member of the Quad Grouping or, indeed, any multilateral effort to disrupt China’s assertive regional and global behavior?
In fact, Jaishankar’s speech suggested that New Delhi could put or remove bilateral India-China tensions in a box at its convenience – and thus, its involvement with both the Quad and BRICS multilateral fora. However, China’s approach is in contrast to viewing India’s actions in tandem with other adversaries such as the West and Japan.
Fourth, the foreign minister said that “the three shocks of the Kovid epidemic, the Ukraine conflict and climate disturbances are also affecting the development of the Asian economy.” Why would he not mention China’s illegal actions on the LAC in this list? If he can declare that “the Asian century requires effective management of the contradictions of our continent”, of which of course India and China are at play at the LAC at the moment, how can the Asian economy remain immune? Is? Whether the omission recognizes that one of India’s most significant responses to Chinese crimes in 2020, namely, various economic measures against Chinese apps, FDI and mobile makers, adequately reflect the trends in the Chinese economy or the Asian economy. Doesn’t impress?
In his speech, Jaishankar continues to both pay respect to the idea of an Asian century as well as dismiss early Indian and other attempts at such an outcome as “political romanticism”. His government’s preferred approach lies in his claim that “Asians are second to none when it comes to real politics”. If so, it is not entirely clear – at least according to current China policy – why he believes it is India’s real politics that will win the day.
Therefore, there is another way in which the above statements by foreign envoys can be interpreted – as a sad commentary on India’s rhetorical tendencies as opposed to tough action.
catch all business News, market news, today’s fresh news events and breaking news Updates on Live Mint. download mint news app To get daily market updates.