Indo-China standoff- should India change its stance CENJOWS16 Jun 2020

Indo-China standoff- should India change its stance CENJOWS16 Jun 2020

https://cenjows.gov.in/article-detail?id=304

Indo-China standoff- should India change its stance 16 Jun 2020

          South and South East Asia appear to be experiencing enhanced Chinese military pressures, while battling the Coronavirus or emerging from it. Chinese military manoeuvres to consolidate the 9 Dash line, disregarding sensitivities of its neighbouring countries, Vietnam, Japan, Philippines and Malaysia, increases tensions within South East Asia. In May this year China stated that foreign fishing vessels will not be permitted in and around the Paracel Islands and Scarborough Shoal, impacting the Philippines and Vietnam, both of whom claim this region, adding to concerns.  It has also begun demanding the Indonesian Natuna islands, located over 1500 Kms from the its mainland and outside the 9 Dash Line.

China continues to threaten Taiwan of forcible reunification, conducting exercises, sailing ships near its shores and moving aircraft close to its airspace. To add pressure on China the US has moved its naval power into the region, accompanied by Australia.

India and China are already facing a standoff in a few places in Ladakh, where there appears to be a stalemate.

Amidst military actions against its neighbours are economic measures against Australia, wolf diplomacy in Europe and a looming economic war with the US. The Chinese government has advised its citizens and students from visiting and studying in Australia, claiming hate crimes against Asians, apart from rejecting Australian beef. The Australian PM, Scott Morrison stated last week, ‘We are an open trading nation, but I am not going to trade our values in response to coercion from wherever it comes.’

On the global stage there are pressures for investigating the origin of the virus as also accusations against China seeking to sabotage global research for a vaccine for the Coronavirus. All through these hostile actions, the Chinese government mouthpiece, Global Times, is spewing anti-West propaganda.

China appears to be fighting almost all who challenge it, seeking to prove that it remains a power which cannot be browbeaten, and nations need to tow their line. China has been attempting to project itself as having recovered from the virus and moving forward full steam on the economic front, whereas the reality is vastly different. 

Internally, Chinese economy is sinking. At the National People’s Congress (NPC), China for the first time since 1980, stated, ‘it wouldn’t be setting a target for economic growth this year.’ Chinese premier Li Keqiang remarked that China’s economic growth, which shrank 6.8% in the first quarter, the first contraction since at least 1992, was expected to drop further in the current quarter. He cited disruptions to supply chains, international trade, volatility in commodity markets as well as decline in domestic consumption, investment and exports. He missed the fact that there is an anti-China wave running through the globe.

Downtrend in the economy is bound to enhance internal tensions. Karishma Vaswani wrote for the BBC, ‘For the last 40 years, China’s Communist Party has been able to promise a simple contract to its citizens: we’ll keep your quality of life improving and you fall in line so that we can keep China on the right path. The coronavirus could be putting that social contract at risk.’ The Global Times has been attempting to display a recovering China by projecting employment data, none of which can independently verified. The English version of the Global Times is for international consumption, not domestic, hence truth from within China remains unclear. There are multiple reports of closed factories and protesting workers.

It is to prove all assumptions wrong that China has resorted to a series of adventures against its neighbours and challengers. It is aware that in case things escalate against one, there would be added pressure from other directions, as nations would seek to push China back. Hence, it has never crossed national red lines, keeping its actions to the point where impacted countries would seek de-escalation rather than respond with force.

This is exactly what it attempted against India. Its moves were executed based on a strategy of seeking to pressurize India and gain concessions, possibly diplomatic or economic. The true reason behind China’s actions have yet to be spelt out. Permanent occupation of territory may not be its main intention, as has been stated by some. This is substantiated by partial pullbacks in some areas, while it holds onto others as a bargaining chip. For China, India is not a military threat as it has no extra territorial demands. India is a challenger to China’s rise in the region and would remain so. Hence, China has not endorsed resolution to the border issue.

The delay in conduct of summer exercises by India in Ladakh, considering the growing spread of the Coronavirus, gave China an opening, which it grabbed. Indian response and counter measures led to China holding its positions, rather than seeking to push forward.

China through a series of calibrated steps led India to seek de-escalation by talks, rather than expansion of the conflict in a quid pro quo move. India, as a policy, even with Pak, has always attempted talks first, failing which it has considered employing military power. China knew talks would flow, if it remained camped, without further provocation. China itself does not seek escalation, because if pushed back, its global standing would be impacted and internal anger against the CCP, already rising, would peak.

All through the standoff, the Chinese propaganda machine remained active projecting Chinese military capabilities, strength and preparedness for operations. In India, counter propaganda was adopted to offset Chinese projections.

The Global Times, the Chinese government mouthpiece, has been playing hot and cold throughout the standoff. On occasions, it has blamed India for breaking earlier agreements and encroaching in their territory, while largely it has sought a peaceful resolution. Since the LAC is a perceived line, perceptions of the Chinese change at will especially when they seek to enhance pressure on India.

Apr to Nov is the season when there is maximum patrolling and standoffs. Since the current standoff commenced in May, there is ample time before the season turns. Hence, there is no rush for a resolution from China.

The multiple incursions launched by China were evidently undertaken on directions of Beijing. Whether it was a decision of the PLA itself or from the CCP remains unclear for the moment, as the PLA is known to influence some aspects of foreign policy directly. Talks at diplomatic and military levels are only a means to convey to the public, that China currently holds the key and would decide when it seeks to ultimately withdraw. As talks progress, China will continue moving small elements back, neither concluding nor expanding the area of standoff, letting pressure remain.

The question which Indian planners need to consider is whether they should continue playing into Chinese hands or choosing their own narrative. History dictates that when nations face China in the eye, China relents, albeit slowly. While we contain their deployment, match them figure for figure and equipment for equipment, do we need to rush for talks. The longer they remain, the more difficult is their own administrative management. India is anyway prepared for the long haul and continues its construction activities along strategic roads in the region.   

Not rushing for an immediate resolution, while preventing their further ingress, would also convey that India is contemplating a similar action elsewhere. It is time to be aggressive. Why should India always project a defensive mindset, enabling them to be offensive, while compelling us to demand status quo ante. It is time to call their bluff, especially as the global community is seeking to contain China and it stands alone. India could consider resorting to similar offensive manoeuvres as China does, in areas of its own choosing.

Calling the Chinese bluff and not rushing into de-escalating talks while resorting to similar actions has always been discarded for fear of escalation. It was the nuclear bluff which prevented India from countering Pakistan till the cross-border and Balakote strikes broke the myth. Similarly, unless attempted against China it could never be certain. The myth must be broken sometime.

The nexus of China and Pak has always been a concern for Indian strategic experts. The current Indian artillery offensive actions against Pakistan is pushing them back, while the valley is largely under control. The timing for staring China in the eye could not be better.

Simultaneously, we need to back economic actions as being taken by organizations like the Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) which represents 7 crore traders and 40,000 trade associations. CAIT has already prepared a list of over 3,000 items which are currently imported from China and easily replaceable by Indian manufactured goods. It seeks to achieve reduction in imports of Chinese manufactured goods by Rs 1 lakh crore (about USD 13 billion) by December 2021. These are actions which would hurt China even more deeply.

India must consider shifting stance and seeking to copy the Chinese model in regions other than where the current standoff continues. It must call the Chinese bluff. Remaining defensive has been our bane over the years’. We have acted offensively before and should consider doing so again. The dragon must be stared at boldly.