The Xinhua news agency and China Daily newspaper, two authoritative platforms of Chinese policies, held out warnings this week over the military standoff with India near the Sikkim border.
China Daily starkly wrote that the “window for a peaceful solution is closing. The countdown to a clash between the two forces has begun….” Xinhua said China’s “restraint has limits and with every day that passes the tether shortens.”
Should these warning be taken seriously? India stubbornly ignored similar warnings 55 years ago in a border war it resoundingly lost and the rest is history.
A war between India and China is improbable since neither side wants it. But below that threshold is a vast space where miscalculations can occur. Indians and Chinese are patriotic people, driven by nationalistic leaderships, and “territorial sovereignty” is a highly emotive issue. What’s alarming is that both governments have successfully rallied domestic opinion.
In China, perhaps, this wasn’t particularly difficult. But in India where a hundred flowers normally bloom, opinion is polarizing at an exceptional rate. It seems all Indians are rising in anger over Facebook posts supporting China’s position. But how could there be a contrarian opinion?
This holds dangers because hubris is a self-devouring monster. The plain truth is that India’s post-Cold War foreign policy calculus will be severely put to test for the first time if a conflict with China ensues. No country has backed India in its seven-week standoff with China. Indians all along fancied that they were leagues ahead of Chinese in “soft power” – yoga, Gandhi, snake charmers, etc. Apparently, that is not so.
It is particularly galling that the United States has not taken any posture favoring India. India’s post-Cold War strategic discourse is heavily laden with the blithe assumption that the US regards India as a “counterweight” to China. Meghnad Desai, a high-flying opinion maker in the English-speaking Delhi circuit, said last week:
“All things that follow now will have a lot to do with what happens in the South China Sea. The US has sent out enough signals. If there is war, it will be a US-China war, with India on the US side, in the South China Sea and in the Himalayas. This trio (India, China and the US) is a very combustible mixture right now.… Ultimately, you have to understand that India cannot stand up to China without American help and support. America cannot stand up to China without Indian help. That is the symmetry in this relationship.”
The sheer naiveté in the above passage sums up India’s misfortune. The Indians refuse to see the geopolitical realities. It doesn’t occur to them that US President Donald Trump will fight wars only if America’s interests are directly threatened. Why should he order the Pentagon to send the marines to the Himalayas or to dispatch a carrier battle group to hunt down Chinese submarines in the Indian Ocean?
The one thing emerging out of the meeting in Manila last Friday between US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi is that the two top diplomats did not waste time on the South China Sea or the Indian Ocean.
Tillerson told the media that North Korea was the main topic in his discussions and whatever extra “bit of reflection on the relationship” with China that took place was devoted to the four high-level dialogues between the two countries last April at the summit at Mar-a-Lago, Florida. That meeting, he said, is “really advancing our two countries’ understandings of the nature of this relationship … and how we should strive to strengthen this relationship so that it benefits the world in terms of maintaining a secure world absent of conflict.”
Interestingly, the White House released a press release on Saturday thanking China for its cooperation in securing the passage of a resolution in the United Nations Security Council on increased sanctions against North Korea. Trump is expected to make a state visit to China in November and Wang disclosed that preparations have begun.
Indian analysts simply do not get the point that the US-China relationship is in an altogether different league. Simply put, the single most crucial template of India’s strategy against China turns out to be delusional – that the US will confront China on India’s behalf.
Equally, Indian strategists never expected that post-Soviet Russia would bounce back on to the world stage. Through the past quarter-century, successive Indian governments have pursued a policy of benign neglect of relations with Russia, which are today in a state of atrophy. On the other hand, Russia-China relations are today at their highest point in decades.
Sadly, India’s “soft power” took a lethal blow during the past three-year period of the Hindu-nationalist government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. This is so not only in liberal Western opinion but also in the Muslim world. The violence against Muslims, the erosion in India’s secularist foundations, the mass upheaval in Kashmir have all received attention internationally. It is also useful to remember that the Organization of Islamic Cooperation represents 54 member countries of the United Nations.
Suffice to say, all these factors will come into play if a war ensues between India and China. India is not a match for China militarily, and in soft power too China may already have an advantage. By cocooning themselves in a fantasyland, Indians are too full of themselves in their refusal to be judged by international opinion – leave alone Chinese and its smaller South Asian neighbors’ opinions.
Rejenal Pang If you have any idea of physics , you would not be saying this . you are excused for your ignorance,
for counting the size of nukes , kindly check with your earlier masters japan , how does nuclear impact human lifes
impact of nukes cannot be established over peice of dumb article
John Brown not the right logic… the passage between two houses claimed and India is saying it belongs to no one. China says we claim the ownership and hence India does not allow because that might eventually impact India amd bhutan adversely
Roy Jao Historically India has never started any war… they just defend. That is part of Indian culture
Indian options are limited while China seems to have many , including suffocating the parrot called Kashmir or helping home grown rebellion at birds neck of India.
No need fire a single bullet
Rejenal Pang what ever you say we dnt care … V r in doklam come & take if u thnk its urs … V hv takn what is our & v ll take what u guys bulding in POK and thn ur cpec investment ll go in pit
i would say the war will last for 4 day and india surrender
Kadayam Subramanian. I do agree with you, Mr Bhadrakumar has been real brave to post this article. He knew the types of responses he was going to get from his own people. He did it anyway. He proved us by just reading though the comments, how the Indian commentators have become polarized It is scary thing when people in a nation, any nation circled themseves on a particular "truth" and not matter what they hold themselves to that "truth". This is even when the rest of the world may not agree with them.
Again, Mr Bhadrakumar has shown to be a great political analyst but also superb braveness.
Zheng He i think you miss the point that china will need this developing market of 1.3 billion people in their demographic prime to sustain growth. today xi is the biggest proponent of globalisation and free trade and the future of trading with india will fall is escalation continues.
india buys no heavy engineering fron china except when there are sanctions like cranes for chabahar port in iran. china sells india 1)cheap manufacturing goods and 2) cheap electronics. prices will rise on suspension of trade but bearable.
main point of issue for india are 1) zero manufacturing of semiconducters in india 2) 95% rare earth materials in world in china 3) $160 billion fdi from china 4) cheap solar chips. these are main issues otherwise india has faced world sanctions and isolations from western world from 1975 to 1999. though in presemt world it may be difficult but both would not want to pursue that
John Brown Ok John….That was the time India was prisioner of one idiotic ideology..we did not use IAF on the War, Remember that was the time when china did not have a commercial plain forget about fighter one…I agreed we lost badly in 62…. but 2017 india is different… one thing to note war machine can not win the war… victory depends on the MAN who control the machine… for your kind information IAF has one of the best fighter Brain in the world… look down the history,, Pakistan had better fighter aircraft against india… but our MAN proved the miracle…..
Please spare the human lives.
John Brown Brush up your history knowledge dude……….
John Brown that’s while point. We don’t need any support moron. We are a war tested nation. ABM S, MISSILES???they don’t matter. Try….just try firing and see what happens.
Ass
Rejenal Pang get your facts right. But you are in oz…..you want to sell your minerals and deindustrialise yourself. What would you know about advancement?
Beto Perez Peru will not make the same mistake that it made 150 years ago and lost the parts of territory to chile. Don’t need a South American to tell us how to manage affairs
John Brown is this your full time job? Hahahaa
John Brown you must either be a pseudonym or a citizen of a mineral exporting country. Hahaha.
There is a treaty between india and Bhutan that needs india to come to Bhutan aid. Also this is not the first time that China is trabgressing into Bhutan. They did so in 1967 and 1984. You can Google it. So please, if you are interested in facts research first.
This author is a fog leaf for left narrative. If you are American you would understand what that means.
Roy Jao your comments show your ignorance. India has a no first use policy. Google it…oh!! Maybe it’s banned ??
Beto Perez its not fantasy dear its realty..these weapen are not for worship.
John Brown India never invad any countey it was chines who are hungry to invade other country ,,china do not belive in internationl rule and regulation even vardic is againt them.. example south china sea… china only accept those things which suites to them ..
Rejenal Pang stupid it was a disputed land .. bhutan is claiming since long china accept it was disputed land no demarcation has been set yet