Doklam Standoff Episode: A new milestone in Indian Diplomacy

The Doklam standoff which began on June 16^th with Indian troops stopping the road construction of PLA troops successfully ended.  10 weeks of sustained negotiations through diplomatic channels led to mutual disengagement of troops from the Doklam region. Unlike previous border incursions, China escalated the border issue and remained defiant. Playing the victim card, Beijing adeptly distorted historical facts. Infringing mutually agreed terms of maintaining status quo in the region, Chinese troops intruded into the disputed trijunction Doklam. China adopted ‘maximalist approach’ and demanded unilateral withdrawal of Indian troops. The border standoff could have inadvertently flared up into an armed conflict as China espoused hostility. Simultaneously, China through its state sponsored launched unabated propaganda (psychological war) against India threatening it into pulling out troops without firing a single shot. But India remained unruffled by the raucous, war-mongering narrative of China. In sharp contrast, India’s approach was measured, matured and responsible and continued to engage with Chinese counterparts diplomatically.

Emboldened by its tact of bullying smaller neighbors into submission, China believed that penetrating the trijunction under the pretext of road construction in the strategically important Doklam region might be a cake walk. Acting upon Bhutan’s request, Indian troops held the ground and prevented PLA troops from extending the road towards the Jhamperi Bridge. Surprised by India’s unanticipated resistance, China portrayed India as an “intruder”, unilaterally changed the status quo and alleged that New Delhi violated its sovereignty. Hawkish sections of Communist Party, soon persisted that China shouldn’t agree for nothing less than complete evacuation of Indian troops from the region. Despite the Chinese belligerence, Indian troops stood its ground and Indian government achieved a significant breakthrough through backroom negotiations. The announcement of mutual disengagement of troops on 28^th August by both sides came just a week ahead of the Annual BRICS summit to be held in China.  But the rabble-rousing hawkish sections and jingoistic propaganda channels of Chinese media hours after the announcement maintained that it was a massive diplomatic victory for China. Giving a unilateral spin claimed that India troops were forced to leave Doklam. With international media giving credence to Chinese propaganda, Indian MEA officials issued another clarification in the evening reiterating that withdrawal of forces which was mutual has commenced and is under verification.

Aside seriously rallying for peaceful negotiations, Modi government strengthened India’s position through extensive global outreach, bilateral engagements and thwarted Chinese attempts to overrun India by commissioning probes on Chinese investments.

International community closely watched the Doklam impasse because of its spiraling effect on the geopolitics and quantum of destruction in the event of a collision course between nuclear states. China’s contemptuous defiance of international laws and its expansive maritime actions in the South and East China Sea raised doubts about its peace rise ever since. Reiterating Chinese peaceful development policy, Liu Xiaoming, Chinese ambassador to UK, stated that “China has deterrence and wisdom to win without fighting. But if needed, China has the courage and capacity to win fighting. This is the essence of the Art of War and the soul of China’s military strategy today”.  The Art of War of Sun Tzu has been corner stone of China’s foreign policy and source of soft power diplomacy. Emulating the crux of Sun Tzu’s philosophy, China not only occupied over 38,000 sq kilometers of Indian territory but steadily established its control over various territorial features in South China Sea without fighting a war. Modi government having fortified Doklam region with armed contingent, prevailed on China to agree for mutual disengagement since, use of force by China, can inadvertently set a precedent that Beijing would use force to grab land. Essentially, Modi too without fighting a war, humbled the Middle Kingdom.

Overwhelmed by raising spiraling trade deficit, amid Doklam standoff India tightened its scrutiny against Chinese investments. India initiated 12 investigations against Chinese products including photovoltaic cells manufactured in China. New Delhi blocked $1.3 billion Shanghai Fosun Pharmaceutical Group acquisition of India’s Gland pharma. In the first week of August, India sought to invoke the principle of reciprocity in awarding projects to foreign companies. With threats of Cyberattacks becoming imminent, India ordered 21 Chinese telecom companies, commanding over 50% of domestic market to furnish details of safety and security practices.

In a bid to force India to withdraw its troops, China made several insidious remarks and even threatened to enter India through disputed territories. Days before Chinese envoy visit to Kathmandu, Weng Wenli, Deputy Director General of the Border and Ocean Affairs stated, “The Indian side has also many tri-junctions. What if we use the same excuse and enter the Kalapani region between China, India and Nepal or even into Kashmir region between India and Pakistan”. China aspired to be super power of Asia. But was wary of India’s rise and influence in South Asia.  Beijing swiftly cultivated bilateral ties with India’s neighbors and wooed them with low interest loans, aid and infrastructure investment. China infused more energy into its ties with Nepal, when it briefly fell apart with India following Madhesi agitation (that crippled movement of all supplies across borders). With its economic clout Beijing not only stoked anti-Indian sentiments but also aimed to turn Nepal away from India. A fortnight ago, Sushma Swaraj’s on visited Kathmandu for attending the meeting of foreign ministers of BIMSTEC. Nepal mindful of India’s concerns asserted that “Nepal does not want to be dragged into the boundary dispute between India and China. Both of our big neighbors should maintain cordial relations through peaceful diplomacy and dialogue”. Reiterating preeminence of Indo-Nepal ties, Prime Minister of Nepal Sher Bahadur Deuba made his first foreign visit to India. To counter China in its immediate neighborhood, India has offered to pump in $250 million to take over 70% share Sri Lanka’s emptiest airport, Mattala International Airport for 40 years. The airport dubbed as White Elephant for incurring losses to a tune of $112 million is just half an hour drive form the Hambantota port sold to China for 99 years.

 China intentionally escalated Doklam issue and incessantly referred to Bhutan as “protectorate of India” to drive wedge between India and Bhutan, the only country other than India who didn’t join OBOR. China offered $10 billion worth aid, low interest loans and direct investments to Bhutan amid border impasse to soften its stance.

European countries adopted a “wait and watch” approach towards Doklam support, US and UK supported India’s position of resolving the issue diplomatically, Japan whole-heartedly extended full support to India. It also warned Beijing shouldn’t make any attempts to unilaterally change the status quo in Doklam. While China made every possible attempt to stall India’s elevation on global arena, Modi through diplomatic outreach cobbled support of US and Israel during the Doklam standoff. In fact, India’s defence acquisitions received big boost with US clearing sale of predatory drones to India. Domestically, China’s tirade of raucous propaganda invigorated the nationalistic tendencies. President Xi commemorating 90^th Anniversary of PLA, gave exhorted forces “to stand up to all enemies who offend China”. In contrast, Prime Minister Modi refrained from referring to Doklam issue both at the monthly Mann Ki Baat or on the eve of Independence Day. 

India’s peaceful resolution of 72-day Doklam saga, not only neutralized China’s raw power and intimidation but encouraged small countries to resist China’s belligerence. End of Doklam saga exemplifies strategic brilliance of Modi’s resolute yet amicable foreign policy. India’s clear-minded, flawless approach towards the Doklam issue now heralds a new beginning to India diplomacy beleaguered by absence of strategy and commitment. Critically acclaimed as being reactive, India’s matured response to Chinese jingoism positioned it as a responsible power.

End of Doklam standoff through mutual disengagement of troops is undoubtedly a momentous diplomatic victory for India. For the past seven decades, despite lofty intentions, India paid heavy price for its botched up diplomatic stratagems. Further a lack of contiguous long standing foreign policy ruined Indian efforts of garnering support and solidarity of comity of nations. Humbling a revisionist China consumed by maritime and territorial expansion from position of strength is no mean effort. By coming to the rescue of smaller neighbor, India upheld agreement of friendship and invariably earned the trust of allies and neighbors. This may force Sri Lanka and Bangladesh to recalibrate their Chinese policy. India’s defiance to buckle down despite China’s belligerent rhetoric can instill new hope in smaller countries harassed by Beijing. While current political dispensation deserves all the praise for collective commendable efforts, China like Pakistan is a repeat offender. India must never let down its guard.

Alternatively, China’s climbdown must be analyzed through the prism of Xi’s political aspirations. Last week, there were speculations that Prime Minister Modi might skip BRICS meeting to be held at Xiamen, China. Though Modi may have other reasons, reports have linked this to prolonged Doklam standoff. China is very particular about public relations and to possibly any embarrassment, Beijing might have agreed to temporary withdrawal. Moreover, Xi, keen on consolidating his position as President for the next five years at the upcoming Communist Congress may hardly afford any armed conflict in the immediate neighborhood. Any irresponsible decision like eruption of war might have ruined his chances. Hence, some strategists argue that it might be too premature to rejoice the outcome of India’s meticulously charted Doklam diplomatic mission.  Also, China hasn’t officially assured that it will steer clear of Doklam. In less than 24 hrs of announcement of mutual disengagement, Chinese spokeswomen briefed that “We will make an overall assessment of the weather conditions and all related factors, and according to actual circumstances complete construction plans”.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Is China ensnared by President Xi Jinping’s unabashed power display? Part-2

Unlike Hu’s regime, Xi’s tenure is marked by slowing growth and brewing geopolitical tensions. The impact of slow economic growth, crippling restrictions on internet and free speech are making people restive. Xi strategically diverted public attention from economic slowdown by setting out a new vision of “resurrecting” and “reinvigorating” Chinese power under the neologism of “Chinese dream”. Months after assuming charge, Xi stressed on the need for patriotic education and establishment of think tanks to strengthen Chinese narrative with a renewed emphasis on Chinese victimization. Armed with twin strategies of instilling the paradigm of “without party there will be no New China” and reinforcing tighter controls on internet, Xi has adopted an assertive foreign policy. Setting the tone for his foreign policy, in his inaugural address stated that “no country should expect us to make a deal on our core interests and no country should expect us to swallow the bitter fruit that undermines our sovereignty, security and developmental interests”.

Gradually through provocative intimidation, challenging the status quo of the Asia-Pacific region and anomalous island building in the South China Sea, China brazenly contravened “Peaceful rise” strategy developed in 2003 by Zheng Bijian, a policy advisor. Hu, reframed the policy as “peace development” to reassure other countries of China’s ascendance. In a marked departure from “hiding one’s capabilities and biding time” (taoguang yuanghui) China is employing strategic and economic clout to advance its interests in the region. Xi powered this new approach by unveiling One Belt One Road (OBOR) and engaged with over 65 countries under the banner of promoting interconnectivity through infrastructure development. To challenge the Western hegemony and power his global ambitions, China established alternative multilateral financial institutes- Silk Road Infrastructure Fund, AIIB (Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank) and NDB (New Development Bank). With a promise of accelerating economic development through extended connectivity networks, China reached out to authoritarian regimes, strategically located, resource-rich small economies to promote OBOR. Through OBOR, believed to be several times America’s Marshall Plan (for rebuilding Europe after World War II), Xi aspired to replace America in the international order. As of now, OBOR, earned dubious acclaim as harbinger of “Debt trap diplomacy” claiming its first victim Sri Lanka. Colombo si reeling under debts for investing in economically unviable infrastructure projects. 

Xi accelerated pace of military modernization. He emphasized that China’s peaceful development will help in reclaiming its legitimate place and restrain regional countries from violating China’s interests in SCS. Under the umbrage of this perception, Xi began to encroach territorial features through land reclamation in SCS aggressively. Later Xi, subjectively changed the narrative of peaceful development with a precondition that “not only should China adhere to peaceful development road; but other countries must also commit themselves to peaceful development road”. Soon Beijing adopted an uncompromising stance on territorial disputes and established East China Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ). Proactive Xi, unlike his predecessors took an initiative to define bilateral relationship with America under the ‘new type of great power relationship’. Xi followed the ‘community under common destination’ approach advocated by Hu and fostered relations with Asian countries. Beneath the façade of the attractive slogans, overpowered by dream of Chinese rejuvenation, Beijing turned intensely belligerent. Xi refused to respect international rules and ruthlessly dismissed the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PAC) verdict with respect to Chinese claims in SCS. China began to intrude into the territorial waters of Japan, intimidate Vietnam, threaten Filipino men from fishing in their territorial waters. Through trade sanctions it punished South Korea for installing THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Air Defence), imposed high tariffs on Mongolia and stalled plans of mega loan offer for hosting the Dalai Lama. Post Crimean annexation, when Russian economy crippled under the burden of West’s economic sanctions, China inked a $400 billion energy agreement and became its largest trade partner. As of now, China and Russia overriding historical rifts are trying to build solidarity through frequent high-level visits, joint military drills and collaborating on Afghan issue. Though trade agreement hasn’t cemented the relations which are by far more complicated to analyze, Russia and China are jointly challenging the retreating Western hegemony. 

Xi’s superfluous, dubious investments in South East Asian countries symptomatic of its coercive diplomacy is having a devastating effect on the solidarity of ASEAN, which emerged as a economic bulwark to stand up to China. Philippines which dragged China for laying claims to its Scarborough Island in 2012, has now changed its stance. President Duterte, has now meekly surrendered to China and even downplaying reports of creeping invasion of Sandy Cay (feature) close to Thitu Island. Simultaneously Xi is arming Taiwan, pressuring Latin American countries to severe their ties with Taipei. China rewarded Panama and reciprocated with trade agreement and investments for disengaging with Taiwan. Xi adamantly reneged on the promise of “One Country two systems” and crushed pro-democratic protests with iron hand in Hongkong. Now Xi had embarked on the mission of rewriting Korean history insisting that Korea was part of China. The overarching global ambitions of Xi might sooner than later can backfire on China.

In the meanwhile, Xi is capitalizing on the years of cumulative American neglect towards South East Asia dating back to fag end of President Obama tenure till now. The retreating American power has emboldened Xi whose coercive diplomacy is disrupting regional stability. Trump’s indifference has forced South East Asian nations to increasingly turn to China. Having coerced other neighbors into abject silence, Xi has is now threatening India which refused to tow in line with Middle Kingdom. China has effectively brought all South Asian neighbors of India except Bhutan into its orbit. India with is huge demographic appeal, rising middle class and huge market potential is now a potential competitor for China. Beijing perceives Indian rise inimical to China’s Asian Dream. Over the years, unresolved border disputes strained Indo-Chinese ties. China’s refusal perpetuated to accept the Mac Mohan line, its claims to Arunachal Pradesh and India providing asylum to the Dalai Lama & thousands of his followers post Tibetan annexation perpetuated the hostilities. After 1962 Indo-China war, in 1979, India re-commenced bilateral relations with China and initiated talks on border disputes in 1981, the regular leadership dialogue which began in 1988 has been a turning point. Since 1962 Chinese troops continued to transgress into Indian territories but with initiation of contacts in 1992 transgressions were peacefully managed.  Though India and China jointly defended interests of emerging economies at various multilateral fora, dissonances and negativities continued to escalate. Despite continually benefitting from expanding trade imbalances with India, China continues to back Pakistan on terrorism and bolsters it nuclear capabilities. Xi has been stalling India’s entry into nuclear regime NSG (Nuclear Suppliers Group), providing safe havens to militants from north east, controlling water flows into India and vetoed Indian efforts at UN for imposing sanctions on Masood Azhar. Above all, Xi frenetically intensified encircling of India by expediting development of Strings of Pearls in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR).

China’s renewed enmity towards India currently stems from India’s refusal to be part of the BRI (Belt Road Initiative), Delhi’s growing closeness with US and for allowing the Dalai Lama to visit Arunachal Pradesh. Xi always had tough stance towards Tibet and Dalai Lama. As a presidential candidate in waiting, in 2011, speaking at Lhasa’s Potala Palace, on the eve of 60 years of Tibet’s peaceful liberation, Xi stated “we should thoroughly fight against separatist activities by the Dalai clique by firmly relying on all ethnic groups and completely smash any plot to destroy stability in Tibet and jeopardize national unity”. Irked by India’s defiance, despite Beijing’s appeals to cancel the Dalai Lama’s trip, China began to punish India, by stonewalling India’s NSG membership, extending veto on Azhar at UN, blocking a tributary of Brahmaputra flowing into India, inking pact with Pakistan to build six dams across Indus river in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK). Beijing has also stopped sharing hydrological data since May 15^th despite two bilateral agreements (2013 and 2014) though India already paid for the data.  Now overflowing Brahmaputra waters flooded states of Assam, Bihar killing over 120 and inundated several hectares of standing crops.

BRI summit was held between 14-16 May and Indian absence triggered backlash from China. Now China set a precondition that it will refrain from sharing river water data until India withdraws troops from Doklam. Going by the sequence of events, it can be comprehende that entering Doklam under the pretext of road construction by Chinese troops has been a planned intrusion. Xi energetically fostered bilateral ties with India’s south Asian neighbors baring Bhutan. Now with prolonged stand-off at Doklam, a region claimed by Bhutan and strategically important for India, China is attempting to drive a wedge between India and Bhutan. China’s nefarious intentions gains more credence with its offer of $10 billion which includes low interest loans, grant and direct investment to Bhutan amidst Doklam stand-off. With BRICS summit just a fortnight away, China is making renewed efforts to woo Bhutan. Speculations are rife whether Prime Minister will attend BRICS Summit at Xiamen with deepening of mistrust between India and China. India is irked by China’s indifference towards resolving prolonged military standoff through peace negotiations and denial of river water data.

Interestingly, Doklam impasse has brought into fore shrouded facets of China into fore. With Xi’s characteristic coercive diplomacy failing to threaten India to withdraw its troops, China’s state-sponsored media unleashed a psychological war on India with a barrage of contemptuous and fallacious propaganda. In the meanwhile, North Korea’s unabated nuclear ambitions and its threats of targeting Guam island have caused intense consternation among American allies who called upon China to rein in on Pyongyang. Manifesting his contradictory standards, Xi called for a peaceful dialogue for negotiating North Korean issue while refused to settle Doklam issue similarly. President Xi Jinping’s impervious stance on issues ranging from international affairs, internal security, military stratagem, domestic affairs and censoring invariably exemplify his authoritarianism. Now, China mandated foreign companies to create special provisions for accommodating party members on board to overlook the governance in joint ventures. MNCs are even forced to allow Chinese investors to access their technology or risk losing market access. About 70% of 1.86 million Chinese private companies are affiliated to Communist Party. This implies that activities, operations, data of over 70% of Chinese investments abroad are controlled/monitored by the CPC (Communist Party of China) directly. Countries, especially India must be wary of growing Chinese investments with bilateral ties going south. Latest slew of constricting reforms might have deleterious effect on investments in China.

Conclusion

China is clambering for glory, prestige and power and seeking to occupy a pivotal place in the world order. By dispensing decades-old collective leadership, Xi strengthened his position as the Commander-in-Chief of China. He emerged as a powerful leader by consolidating his position within the party and over military. Diligently emulating Maoist ideals, and Marxist principles he has become “redder than red”. By characteristically exterminating opposition with strict anti-corruption campaign and overriding all limitations, he accumulated power by invoking nationalism. Sieging the vacuum created by American reluctance to engage with the World, Xi is steadily making claims to the top slot.

Amidst these far-reaching aspirations of Xi, factional feuds within Communist party of China are reaching a feverish pitch. Speculations abound that the high-handed censoring, internal fighting within the party, labor unrest, crackdown on opposition, widening rich and poor divide might eventually cause sudden disintegration like Soviet Union. Though strategists strongly contest such an ordeal for China but it might be exceedingly impossible for Xi to preserve total dominance of party over all aspects of governance and steer China as a forward state. Even China’s ugly meddling of geopolitics might have dangerous repercussions on long run. China’s over ambitious attempts to project power, mercantilist approach, efforts to sanitize history to bolster party rule, intransigent stance of its leaders might eventually force nations to join hands against China. China has been recklessly needling India, Japan and other South East Asian nations. America is haranguing China for its inaction in tackling North Korea and losing patience. With trade deficits snow-balling, China is emerging as a bigger threat to Trump administration forcing it to pull back investments and clamp imports from China. Hubris often led to tumbling of great empires. China might be no exception to this rule. Its time Xi must peg back its zealous global ambitious.

Is China ensnared by President Xi Jinping’s unabashed power display? Part-1

Rare genre of strong assertive, nationalist leaders is dominating contemporary World order. Despite dubitable reputation an unparalleled public support commanded by these leaders has now become a curious case of study for experts. Of them, President Xi Jinping, the General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, Chairman of Central Military Commission, and President of Peoples Republic of China is widely reckoned for his formidable authority. Last week, China’s topnotch training school for communist cadres released a book titled, “Xi Jinping’s Seven Years as an educated youth” and made it an “essential” reading for all the communist party cadres. The book dwells on the seven years of arduous struggle of Xi, who was ordained to embrace an impoverished life during the cultural-revolution imposed by Mao Zedong. The book is a collection of interviews of villagers who worked with Xi when he was at Liangjiahe village of Shaanxi Province from 1969 to 75. Indian newspaper Times of India, reported that this book is now distributed to young people to enlighten and impress upon them Xi’s “unshaken pursuit of ideals”. Xi’s latest self-promotion campaign ahead of the key 19^th Communist Congress meeting in November is an attempt by the President to cement his authority over the party cadre.

Similarly, Xi accelerated elevation of his loyal generals to highest positions in PLA (Peoples Liberation Army) to have an over-arching control over the party. Further, Xi has given new postings to all regional commanders in the PLA to prevent collusion between the army generals and political opponents, before the 19^th party Congress. Twenty-Six new commanders and thirteen group armies are shifted enmasse and posted in regions away from their command areas. This massive overhauling of military had a deeper political message. But Chinese experts attributed Xi’s latest move to Mao Zedong’s “mountaintopism” or Shantou zhuyi, a dogma of restraining army commanders from developing their personal army. They argued that military factionalism led to fall of Qing Dynasty and defeat of Chiang Kai-Shek and Mao’s mechanism can reduce threats from regional commanders. Aside curtailing politicking efforts of PLA commanders, this new development has wider connotations. In his address at Beijing’s Great Hall of People on the 90^th Anniversary of founding of PLA, Xi commanded PLA to “carry forward and implement the Party’s absolute leadership. As comrade Mao Zedong once pointed out, our principle is to have the party command the military and not the military command the party”. Xi’s military rejig is an attempt to reiterate party’s supremacy over military and government.

To this end, since April 2016, Chinese media has been unwaveringly referring to President Xi as “Commander in Chief” of the country to re-emphasize the Maoist norm established at the 1929 Gutian Conference.  At Gutian, in Fujian Province, Mao in 1929 pioneered combining barrel of gun, trained armed peasantries and imbibed Marxism to develop the proletarian Army, PLA. He stated that “political work is by means an auxiliary to, but the life line of the Red Army”. Xi who has become “Paramount Leader” (Paramount Leader is considered extremely powerful and the title is bestowed upon leaders capable of leading the emerging super power with largest growing military force to newer heights) by becoming the General Secretary of CCP in November 2012, was crowned as “Core Leader” at the sixth plenum in October 2016. The designation of core leaders has greater significance in Chinese politics. Deng Xiaoping who declared Mao as first Core leader underlined that “any leadership must have a core, a leadership without a core is unreliable”. Deng was second generation core leader; Jiang Zemin was third. Hu who was considered a weak leader wasn’t conferred the title whereas Xi was declared a core leader. But unlike his predecessors, Xi hasn’t nominated potential successors raising lingering doubts about his intentions of continuing beyond the usual two-term tenure. Ahead of Congress Meet, Xi successfully ousted tentative presidential candidate Sun Zhengcai provincial head of Chongqing by levelling charges of political indiscipline and replaced with Xi loyalist Chen Miner. China has laid out a system wherein successor for President or Premier would be anointed five years ahead of leadership transition to avoid internecine power struggles. This ruthless defenestration of a potential presidential candidate is sparking speculations about Xi’s unwillingness to cede political space to any person.

Xi has been extremely authoritarian unlike his predecessor Hu Jintao, who believed in “collective responsibility dictum”. Xi tried to assert his position much before taking up the reigns with most of his policies and ideas reminding China of authoritarian Mao. Xi firmly believes that strong authoritarian leadership is corner stone of China’s model of “core socialist value system” and aspires to provide an alternative to core Western values. At the third plenum of 18^th Communist Congress, in April 2013, Xi warned China of the impending dangers of infiltration of ideas that can threaten their single party rule and urged party cadres to be vigilant. In fact, an internal party communique was circulated among the cadres enumerating threat posed by democratic values to communist ideology of China. The paper, famously referred as Document 9, (being the ninth paper released in that year) identified seven threats. These include- promoting western constitutional democracy that has multiparty systems, general elections, independent judiciary and national armies; promoting universal values; promoting civil society; neo-liberalism or unrestrained liberalization; freedom of press; reassessing history (historical nihilism) and questioning reform and opening (campaigning for transparency). To sum up, Xi attested, Communist party is an unquestionable authoritarian, sacrosanct and supreme.  To insulate the Chinese society from the influences of external world, he censored internet, imposed restrictions on freedom of press and finally enacted law ensuring strict punishments for bloggers and writers who questioned the political authority. The notorious Great Firewall of China is an outcome of these ill-gotten fears. Ironically, while China ordered its leading telecommunication companies to crack down on the tools that can circumvent its firewall, it actively promoted penetration of its companies to access sensitive information of other countries. In 2015, China enacted National Security Law to control and secure the internet and information systems. Xi thus, steadily expanded his control over every aspect of governance. Xi who was commander-in-chief consolidated his control over internal security by establishing National Security Commission in November 2013. He oversaw implementation of reforms by heading the Central Leading Group for Comprehensively Deepening Reforms like one constituted by Deng. 

Xi who rose to power as clean politician adopted an implacable stance against corruption. He announced an eight-point rule guide to fight corruption which became rampant after Deng’s economic reforms propelled country into high economic growth. Xi strategically turned anti-graft operation into a tool for bullying his political opponents. Imprisonment of Bo Xilai contender for top most leadership position under a corruption scandal exemplifies notoriety of Xi’s corruption campaign. Xi has gone from strength to strength becoming “Chairman of everything” emulating the most dominant leader Mao. To the annoyance of senior party members, Xi reduced the number of places in the politburo standing committee from nine to seven. To the worst nightmare of Xi’s political opponents, his veritable political ambitions may upset smooth transition of power.  

As President Xi’s, larger than life image looms over the World, it might be worth capitulating his steady ascent. Xi, son of Xi Zhongxun, a first-generation revolutionary was vice-chairman of National People’s Congress. When Xi was 15, his father was jailed and purged during cultural revolution. For the next seven years, Xi worked in the country side and later joined the Communist Party. From 1982 to 2002 he served the party at various positions in different coastal provinces. In 2002, he became full member of 16^th Central Committee. Li Keqiang backed by Hu Jintao and Xi were appointed to nine-member politburo standing committee in 2007. Xi was appointed as Vice-Chairman of Central Military commission as Li failed to get backing of the old guard. Xi emerged as consensus choice for Hu and Jiang Zemin group. Somehow, Xi was initially perceived to be a person who could be easily manipulated by Jiang and his deputy Zeng Quinghong. Moreover, Xi’s toughness in reining in on the corrupt officials close to Jiang in Shanghai province earned him a great repute. Further, his decision of not using official villa and announcing his intention of converting the same into a home for veteran comrades played to his advantage. He thus scored quick brownie points over Li Keqiang who had two post-graduate degrees in economics and law from Peking University but came from non-revolutionary background.

Xi’s dual qualification as member of Communist Party and victim of cultural revolution outcast put him in good stead. The hard work rendered during the country side is believed to have made him much bolder and abiding toward the ideology. It is believed that Xi said that period of “eating bitterness” increased his loyalty towards Communist party. Though he criticized cultural revolution, he embraced the party. He extensively networked with party cadres and especially in his province he downsized opposition.

Li and Xi ascended party ladder in different ways. Li was Communist Party Youth League leader and was immensely popular. While Xi represented “Princelings” and worked for economically endowed group. Most believe that Chinese leaders unlike their western counterparts could make to the top by not meddling with the special interests of vested groups in party cadres. Hence, they may not be ideally clever and capable but adept in dealing people. Interestingly. Xi served in many provinces but throughout his tenure he hasn’t done anything phenomenal or ground-breaking working. He worked in many departments but never ended up in a collision course with the cadre. By and large he had safe career ascent. He enviously guarded his true intentions and garnered support from different departments. But none had any inkling about his real thoughts and beliefs. As in charge the Summer Olympics 2008, Xi won laurels of party cadres and foreign leaders. Hailing his organizational abilities, Xi was made in charge of 60^th Anniversary celebrations of founding of Peoples Republic of China. This event was of immense significance for China as it marked the 50^th anniversary of Tibetan uprising, 20^th Anniversary of pro-democratic Tiananmen protests and 10^th Anniversary of persecution of Falun Gong. This program which was referred ad 6521 project provided Xi with a unique opportunity of identifying the potential threats to absolutism of Communist Party and reviving party cadres. This experience helped him to develop strong links with party workers and in identified the domestic threats.

Even before taking up reigns, Xi at 2011 CCP meeting urged party members to “resolutely combat the wrong tendency to distort and smear party’s history” and asked them to stop using empty words and political jargon from their speeches. While he avoided talking about his father vice-chairman Xi Zhongxun who fell out with Mao after he intensified the call for class struggle. Xi’s appeals of not smearing party’s history eventually paved way for rehabilitating senior Xi’s shrouded reputation. Xi maintained strong connect with princelings in PLA and had a hawkish foreign policy. Xi, the fifth-generation leader an ardent believer of Mao dictums, strongly urged party cadres to “pay attention to Marxist cannon” and “focus on salient points and concentrate on studying the quintessence-particularly important works of Mao Zedong”.  Having emulated Maoist ideals, Xi eventually emerged as an absolute authoritarian and as powerful as Mao.

@ Copyrights reserved.

China’s despicable racism

Last week Charlottesville racial attacks created a buzz across the World. White Supremacists marched with torches chanting Nazi slogans down the lanes of University of Virginia. The next day morning representatives of Klu-Klux-Klan joined the protests ostentatiously displaying of racists symbols swastika and confederate flags. Soon counter racist groups too assembled. The protests turned violent when a white supremacy supporter mowed car into pedestrians, killing a woman and injuring 19 others. The attacks for once, brought to fore the dangers of outbreak of racism, that once triggered a World War. Even as debates of sudden outburst of racist protests began to dominate the western world, Middle Kingdom released a flagrantly racist video demeaning India.

Ever since the Doklam stand-off, Chinese saber-rattling has unsettled the delicate bilateral relations between the two countries. Through impetuous jingoistic remarks, the hyperventilating Chinese media has stirred up psychological warfare. Days before India’s 70 years of Independence Day celebrations, Chinese media Xinhua unleashed an unceremonious propaganda against India through a despicable racist video. The 3 min 20 sec video titled as “seven sins of India” vilified India showing a man wearing turban and a fake beard, mocking at the Indian Sikh community. The video available on the social media network has yet again exposed the ugly side of China. With India firmly committed to diplomatic peace negotiations as the plausible solution for the impasse, restive China began intimidating India with contemptible attacks. The detestable portrayal of India and the unrelenting media attacks instead of frustrating India has inadvertently exposed the darker side of China which was oft discussed in the intellectual and media circles. Strict media censoring of authoritarian Chinese regime had ensured that World was oblivious of its dictatorial overbearing towards the non-Han minorities in China. Though China claims to be a pluralistic society and that minorities never suffered discrimination, the real picture is strikingly different.

Interestingly, while China assiduously climbed the ladder of economic stability achieving two-digit growth for three decades, it recklessly failed to invest energies in building a harmonious society. Chronic social divide and rampant racial prejudices have been integral to Chinese society. Han ethnicity constitute 92% of China and the remaining eight percentage or roughly 120 million include the ethnic minorities like Tibetans, Uighurs, Kazakhs, Koreans, Mongols. Tibetans and Uighurs are the dominant community in Tibetan Autonomous Region and Xinjiang Autonomous Region which form nearly half of the Chinese land mass. Sadly, these two ethnic minorities have been the targets of Chinese oppression and racial discrimination.

Traditionally China wasn’t overtly racist but took immense pride in its Han ethnicity who were termed as “the yellow race”. By the end of 19^th century and beginning of 20^th Century, thousands of Chinese intellectuals educated in Japan, aside emulating certain western values were deeply impressed by their concept of “minzokushugi” which meant “racism” and “expressed nationalist vision of race”. Indeed, this was the first principle of the “The Three Principles of People” advocated by Sun Yat-Sen, the father of modern China who heralded the modern revolution in 1911. The equivalent of the Japanese term in Chinese “minzu zhuyi” is used to describe nationalism. By 1920, Sun started believing that “If Manchus, Mongols, Uighurs, Tibetans and Chinese Muslims were to be ‘races’ with moral and cultural destinies distinct from that of Chinese, it would be inevitable for them to seek homelands distinct from China”.  Overpowered by the predicaments of separate identities might hinder the goal of transforming China into a modern state, he thought “We must facilitate the dying out of all names of individual peoples inhabiting China, i.e Manchus, Tibetans etc”. This idea gained much ground and dramatically changed the perceptions of architects of modern China. Though China’s constitution has promised equality, it has failed to put proper mechanisms in place to enforce the vision which believed in “satisfying the demands and requirements of all races”.

As of now, Tibetans who constitute 5% of the total population are regarded as second-class citizens and are deprived of basic rights. China which is supposed to protect the rights of minorities ruthlessly suppressed them. China has even discouraged the use of Tibetan language and made learning of Chinese language mandatory from the High School Level. Tibet, a knowledge repository of the ancient Buddhist tradition and culture is now battling to protect its heritage from the Chinese onslaught. The Communist party which established its rule in 1949 in China annexed Tibet which had self-rule. China forced Tibet to sign the “17-point agreement for peaceful liberation of Tibet” in 1951 under duress. Ever since, the oppressions of Communist regime of China continued to wreak havoc in lives of Tibetans. Tibet accredited as an autonomous region was never allowed to function independently. In 1959 Dalai Lama sought Indian asylum and repudiated the agreement. But China evicted Tibetans from leadership positions and incarcerated leaders under the charges of stoking “local nationalism”. Most of the prisoners were tortured, deprived of medical treatment, proper diet and were forced to do hard labor. The deplorable conditions and inhuman treatment meted to Tibetans drew international attention. Amnesty International reports highlighted human-rights violations in Tibet. UN General Assembly passed several resolutions condemning China’s invasion of Tibet and human rights violations. But there was change in situation on ground. Since Tibetans had no access to good educational facilities Chinese Hans occupied high-profile jobs. Thus, even income disparities too widened. Tibetans were systemically discriminated. Soon Chinese moved to Tibetan regions altering the demography of the region. As per reports, by 1999, Tibet had 7 million Chinese migrants as opposed to 6 million Tibetans, making them a minority in their own country.

In 2008, series of immolations fueled massive protests across the plateau. To curtail brewing unrest, China fast-tracked development and intensified urbanization in the regions where China faced stiff resistance. But the benefits accrued by Tibetans through massive infrastructure projects in the plateau have been negligible. Simultaneously, China began racial profiling, intensified vigilance and surveillance in sensitive areas, imposed restrictions on the movements of people and confiscated their valid travel documents.

Aside Tibetans, China’s human rights abuses against Uighurs in the Xinjiang Autonomous Province found a critical mention in the Amnesty International. China occupied the erstwhile East Turkestan, home to one million Muslim Uighur of Turkic ethnicity in 1949 and renamed it as Xinjiang (meaning new province). Like Tibet, Xinjiang has been theatre for Chinese suppression wherein Uighurs face discrimination in employment, housing, education and suffer political marginalization. Even their religious freedom is curtailed, children in schools are forced fed during Ramadan. Due to severe restrictions on the religious, cultural and commercial activities of Uighurs, separatist movement began to gain momentum. In 2009, Uighurs launched massive attacks against government, the Urumqi riots lead to death of 200 people. Ever since, China began to treat Uighurs as a tribe of Taliban and forced countries to extradite Uighurs. Subsequently, Communist regime encouraged mass migration of ethnic Hans to the Xinjiang leading to reduction of native population to 45% from 90%. It began to crush the Uighur resistance with iron-hand. But again in 2012 Uighur groups launched attacks killing 24 people. Since then China adopted grid-style policing followed in Tibet. Convenience police stations were set up for monitoring activities of citizens within a radius of 300-400mts for 24-hour patrol. High definition security cameras were installed, community policing was encouraged and high-tech voice and face recognition software were used to track suspects. Unsurprisingly, China’s obsessive monitoring of the autonomous region skyrocketed the total internal budget for Xinjiang to over $25 billion in 2015. The scale of expenditure exemplifies China’s insecurities towards its minorities. To make matters worse, China has even banned Islamic names in Xinjiang province as a part of crackdown on alleged extremism. It is believed that China spends more on domestic security than national defense. The amounts spent on Tibetan and Xinjiang autonomous provinces is three times the national average (1). Intense racial profiling amplified mistrust between the minorities and the ethnic Han population.  But impudent China continues to justify its actions as “Han Chauvinism”.

Even now, China is indifferent to concerns of minorities with most of them living on the fringes of the society in poorest provinces. The authoritarian communist regime continues to censor and dictate the narratives. It blocks discussions on minorities in academic institutions, research centers, media or press. China never made any attempts to assimilate the minorities nor ameliorate their mistrusts.  Despite the strong undercurrents of racism, China choses to ignore it. While economic development has elevated China’s status in international community, its contemptuous racial discrimination may not portend well for its aspirations of replacing America. Above all, does it behoove a regional economic bulwark to coerce India into subjugation with a detestable racial video to pullout troops? With this mocking video China has not only touched a new low but invariably dismantled industriously built façade of soft diplomacy. This mendacious propaganda has given enough reason for India and others to delve the China’s ugly racism.

@ Copyrights reserved.

West’s inability to rein in on the Dragon it propped

Unremitting Doklam stand-off besides, escalating tensions, has offered a unique opportunity to unravel the intentions of China. India’s strategic defiance amidst ratcheted Chinese diplomatic rhetoric has taken the World by a surprise. Despite Chinese media warning of “the window for peace is closing for India” India has firmly dug its heels, refused conditional withdrawal of troops, and pressed for diplomatic negotiations. Beijing’s aggressive posturing and war-mongering decimated international perceptions of “peaceful rise”.

The exalted show of strength highlighting strategic assets at military base, Zhurihe in Inner Mongolia commemorating 90^th anniversary of PLA and subsequent strident call by President Xi to stand “up to all enemies who offend China” reinforced Beijing’s apoplectic stance. Though some Chinese officials have privately confided that “China has erred, with the leadership misled to believe that India will silently accept Chinese road building in Doklam”, media’s exaggerated narrative has complicated things for Chinese military. India in unequivocal terms ruled out pulling of troops and called for maintenance of status quo the region. China is now stuck in a limbo as any de-escalation will be a loss of face. China’s intransigent approach towards Doklam standoff is just a top of iceberg of its burgeoning hegemony. Unabated Chinese adventurism is now reaching unprecedented levels. As of today, none can predict how matters will turn out. But India’s approach whilst China’s high-decibel rhetoric is highly commended and senior US diplomat applauded India’s “mature approach”.

On the other hand, China’s high-handedness has now come under intense scrutiny.  Emboldened by ineptness of the West, China is roiling the security of the region with its unending spree of historical territorial claims. Giving wings to its geopolitical ambitions, China instituted several think-tanks to dig vast Chinese history to find legitimacy to its fictitious claims. The nocuous nine-dashed line, which was unheard of prior to inception of Communist regime is now threatening the stability of the region. Fictitious territorial claims have turned into iniquitous tools for asserting hegemony for China.

Philippines irked by China’s assertions over the Scarborough Island dragged it to international court. But Beijing refused to accept the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) verdict that quashed Chinese claims over the geographical features in SCS. The West’s muted response to China’s defiance towards international rules and its relentless island building spree in SCS is now becoming a matter of serious concern. Besides, the enviable three decadal two-digit economic growth, West’s unwillingness to contest China’s excesses have given it a pretext to exercise its hegemony in the region. Consequently, China is now incrementally expanding its sphere of influence. Slowly China began to assert its control over strategically important regions. China which entered the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) to join anti-piracy operations continued to remain the region long after pirate threat has subsided and smartly created “String of Pearls”. In 2012, it created Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) over the east China sea and by fag end of President Obama’s tenure began sending vessels closer to Alaska. While it strongly objects to Freedom of Navigation and joint exploration of oil in SCS. In absence of a power to call its bluff, China continued to strengthen its hold in the region.

Simultaneously Beijing powered its hegemonic aspirations through the One Belt One Road (OBOR) roping in 28 countries. The transmuted OBOR, a global connectivity initiative turned out to be a “debt trap diplomacy” began inflicting irrevocable financial damages to countries. The OBOR projects in many countries were meted with massive public protests for the grave environmental violations. China, deliberately invested in countries with authoritarian or dictatorial regimes and unstable economies, regardless of economic viability of the projects, plunging the host nations into a debt trap. But the west chose to largely overlook the pattern and motives behind Beijing’s investments. Instead sent official delegations to BRI (Belt Road Initiative) summit, as an endorsement of its strategic initiatives.

Also, the West which earned reputation of defender of democratic values remained callous towards China’s abominable disregard towards international rules, human rights, freedom of press, internet censoring and curbs, intolerance towards domestic dissidence, excesses in Tibetan region and high-handed suppression of Uighar’s freedom of religion. West’s silence strengthened Chinese resolve to intimidate and bully smaller nations. China began forcibly compelling nations to fall in line. Beijing punished Mongolia for hosting Dalai Lama by wielding economic leverage. It suspended talks on a major loan and brought the nation to feet by imposing high border fees on trucks entering China. Similarly, it rattled South Korea over THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Air Defense) deployment by imposing unofficial trade sanctions and curtailing tourism.  China considered THAAD deployment and Dalai Lama’s international standing inimical to its security and authority. Unfortunately, despite China needling Japan and South Korea, America refused to come down heavily. China’s unabashed temerity to threaten or bully countries remained unchallenged.

In the span of past three months, besides aggressively penetrating the Doklam trijunction infringing mutual agreements, China has threatened Vietnam, forcing it to stop oil exploration at the edge of its exclusive economic zone in SCS, conducted joint military exercises with Russia in Baltic sea to send a message to NATO countries. Chinese spy ship operated in Australian exclusive economic zone when the later was holding military exercises with US and Japan. It flew fighter jets over Taiwan and Okinawa island of Japan. Through outlandish display of military, air force and naval clout, China is attempting to showcase global power shift.

China is slowly excelling the art of taming the west. Having emerged as global manufacturing hub, China has cultivated trade relations with far and distant lands. Soon it emerged as major trading partner for many countries. Under the guise of connectivity, China has developed extensive economic relations Beijing penetrated Eurasian region. Beijing heavily invested in European countries which were reeling under economic crisis after the 2008 recession. It gradually widened scope of cooperation to sectors like space technology, infrastructure development, building of nuclear reactors and became vital economic partner. The growing economic clout of China effectively guarded it from being sanctioned for any violations of human rights or media censoring. Except Germany none of the European countries condemned China’s illegal detention of Nobel Laureate Liu Xiaobo who succumbed to cancer. While Germany, France and Italy expressed concerns over increasing non-EU investments in Europe without naming China, Germany alone tightened regulations to reduce Chinese acquisitions in Germany.  

For long China remained isolated. China being a communist country, America perceived it be expansionist and stayed away. Instead it wanted to create a rift between the two large communist nations China and Russia. After the eventual split between China and Russia, America moved closer to China. Pakistan who was an ally of America, honestly brokered Sino-US relations. Marking a new beginning to friendly ties both countries signed Shanghai Communique in 1972 and established diplomatic relations in 1979. This coincided with China’s “reform and opening” policy. With America suffering from stagnant economy and inflation and China struggling to uplift a sinking economy, both countries turned to each other for reviving their economies. This marked “co-dependency” instantly kick started the Chinese economy which soon began to supply cheap goods to American consumers. American consumerism has steered Chinese economy. Soon major Western and American companies shifted base to China because of low production costs. Having established formidable global credentials as rising economy, China became lucrative destination for new technologies. China even anchored American economy which suffers from poor domestic saving through Treasury bonds. Of late, China is coercing American MNCs to transfer technology, though it is not mandatory under WTO. Disregarding commitment towards protection of intellectual property rights, China is now promoting indigenous innovation through imported technologies. Aside, dubious currency manipulation, China with renewed efforts on techno-nationalism is aiming to replace America as leading economy. America was thus, instrumental for China’s meteoric economic rise. Economic stability reinvigorated Chinese global aspirations.

Intriguingly, America had no qualms in embracing a Communist China while it strongly detested Russia stems for being a communist nation. American hostility towards Communist Russia stems from its perception of Moscow as an aggressive, expansionist power. Then, how could America fail to fathom the dubious aspirations of a Communist China? Now, America hesitates to impose trade sanctions on China for the fear of dumping Treasury bonds. Apparently, America is now finding it difficult to tame China, that keeps tight leash on two rogue nations- Pakistan and Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). While America can afford to be indifferent to Chinese aggression towards India, America is hard pressed to take a position on China’s role in containing DPRK. DPRK’s calumnious posturing and threats of destroying America is now keeping Washington on tenterhooks. By transferring missile technology to DPRK and nuclear technology to Pakistan, China has unleashed two dangerously armed rogue nations on the World. American having stationed its forces in Afghanistan for past 17 years and spent trillions of dollars is grappling hard to find a logical solution. US allied and funded Pakistan to resolve Afghan crisis but to no avail. Pakistan buttressed by its all-weather friend China is reluctant to cooperate with America. Over years, the West turned a blind eye towards China’s inimical strategic cultivation of two rogue countries. Now, dangerous showdown is brewing, but America is staggeringly powerless.

Despite the full blown psychological war, India called Chinese’s bluff, it is appalling that West has failed to do so….

@ Copyrights reserved.

India @ 70 : Land of Contradictions

Seventy years is a good amount of time. Completion of seventy years of existence as an independent country with 1.25 billion population and spectacular diversity is an occasion of celebration and introspection as well. India the largest democracy, cradle of World’s oldest civilizations is a young country. Thousands of freedom fighters through their selfless sacrifice drove away the oppressive forces culminating in liberation of India from the colonial shackles. The British having sapped India’s vital resources and emptied its treasury left the country to fend for itself anticipating that country will soon crumble under the burden of disunity. Putting rest to Winston Churchill’s prophesies and ignominious references “Power will go to rascals, rogues and freebooters. All leaders will be low caliber and men of straw. They’ll have sweet tongues and silly hearts. They will fight amongst themselves for power and the countries will be lost in squabbles. A day will come when even air and water will be taxed”, India at 70 is alive, kicking epitomizing democracy and pluralism. Unfortunately, bloodied partition was inflicted upon India even before it could experience the joy of painstakingly earned freedom. Independent India despite facing numerous internal and external threats endured and bravely defended sovereignty. Though there have been strains in the democracy at various stages like the dark phases of Emergency, India bounced back after every fall. 

Independent India’s journey so far has been a roller coaster ride swinging earnestly through periods of despair and hope. The aspects of exulted success have been overshadowed by tumultuous failures. As India asserted its new position as emerging space giant with a successful spree of satellite launches and phenomenal maiden Mars Mission, the technological ineptness of DRDO which failed to develop an indigenous assault rifle created doubts about India’s scientific mettle. India’s potential as fastest growing economy in the world has turned it into a lucrative investment hub but India’s contemptible ease of doing business lead to low rate of project realization. Low-cost technologies are making India medical tourism hub even as shoddy maintenance and administration of government hospitals is claiming lives of millions. As per IMF estimates for year 2017, India has third largest GDP based on purchasing power parity but it continues to slide down the rankings of Human Development Index, reflecting the glaring increase in inequalities. Similarly, India’s low Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) which declined marginally in recent years and the low sex ratio are a mockery to India’s standing among community of nations.

The unique recognition scrupulously earned by budding young Indian scientists of Team Indus made India incredibly proud. It is one among the five teams qualified to compete in $30 billion Google-sponsored competition to operate robotic spacecraft on Moon by 2018. Discovery of massive galaxy super cluster “Saraswati”, 600 million lightyears away by team of astrophysicists from Inter University Centre for Astronomy and Astrophysics and Indian Institute of Science and Education Research (IISER) has been source of immense pride and joy. On the contrary, Indian Universities slipping in the latest QS World university rankings raised concerns about the standards of Indian education. Contrasting pictures of hope and frustration continue to haunt Indian scenario. The reports of low employability pale the prospective advantage of India’s rich demographic dividend. At the same time, a boom in start-up culture spear-headed by young, enthusiastic, and dynamic youngsters has instilled new hope about the new generation. Interestingly while a surge in the new breed of entrepreneurs is imparting new energy into system, rampant corruption perpetrated by the veritable politician-bureaucrat-police is crippling progress of the country. The list of such contraries that evoke a sense of desperation and instilled hope are endless. These contrasting developments inadvertently divided Indians into eternal pragmatists and skeptics.

India successfully drove away colonial forces, but stigmatized Indian mind still longs for a western sanction and approval. Unlike countries who obtained independence around the same period, India hasn’t forsaken the colonial vestiges like bureaucracy and eerily adopted their institutional legacies. It never attempted to revamp the systems to cater to the needs and requirements of Indian society. Even after seven decades of independence we still religiously adopt the judicial laws, housing systems, health care and education introduced by the imperialists. The colonial hangover still has a larger overbearing on the Indian mind, thought and intellect. Moving forward, Indian mind slowly began to acknowledge anything foreign as superior and began importing defence technologies and advanced scientific expertise. Enslaved by colonial hangover, Indians are now seeking approval of the west to acknowledge the epics, precincts of vast Indian heritage. Any advocate/ believer of epics is labelled and chastised as a religious bigot. For decades, the west-influenced thought process dominated the Indian realm. But slowly an alternative narrative is emerging and trying to reclaim its space. Aside, jostling of contrasting thought processes, a silent group is toiling hard to assert Indian identities. A kind of commotion is silently brewing within the Indian society turning it into a breeding ground for contrarian views and perceptions. Sadly, the colonial hangover still besieges Indian academic institutes. It is appalling that sections of Indian society have no qualms in calling ‘India as land of degenerates’. For them, India is all about sati, untouchability, caste system. Such is the power of the colonial imprint, that thousands of educated Indian elite still tend to magnify the mildews of the past.

Currently Indian domain is witnessing new hope amidst apathy, gender discrimination, widening societal gaps and poor governance. Though things are under control, domestic front is heated up by movements for separate state, unrelenting insurgency and infiltration bids into Kashmir, states exploring legal options for separate flags, protests against imposition of Hindi, Maoist attacks and political killings. Even external threats are looming large with the possibility of a two and half war scenario. Millions are exasperated by years of neglect, lack of infrastructure and poor governance. But fortunately, the aspiring Indian class harbor beacon of hope. Unlike in the past, for a change, India’s top most hierarchical positions are occupied by people from modest origins with dynasticism forced to retreat. As of now, the voices of resilient Indians hopeful of India’s resurgence are steering it infusing renewed vigor, giving wings to its dreams.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Sino-Thai engagement culminating in construction of Asia’s Panama Canal

While China’s ominous investments in Sri Lanka and Pakistan are grabbing headlines, China’s carrot and stick policy towards Thailand needs considerable attention. Yet another ASEAN conference successfully concluded last week at Manila and once again ASEAN (Association of South East Asian Nations) countries failed to bring out anti-Beijing resolution. ASEAN’s meek response to hegemonic China despite Beijing’s unremitting belligerence in South China Sea (SCS) reflects the growing discord within the ASEAN economic grouping. ASEAN which was painstakingly built as bulwark against China, is now wilting under the torment of Chinese divisive tactics. Apparent fissures inflicted by Chinese coercive economic diplomacy and muscle power of Beijing has eroded the solidarity of ASEAN countries. Despite China’s penetrating aggression, being the single largest trading partner and largest investor in ASEAN countries, voices of protests within the group are seldom addressed. As of now, China’s relations with ASEAN countries is rather complex. Each country has a unique relation with China. Beijing managed wooed Cambodia and Laos with massive infrastructure investments. Besides trade and investments, Sino-Burma relations are leveraged by domestic insurgencies with Burmese militant groups having safe havens in Chinese territories.  High-income group countries Brunei and Singapore are slowly trying to reduce their dependence on China. Beijing’s relations with middle-income group countries -Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam are steered by increased economic activity and infrastructure initiatives.

Thailand is the second-largest economy in ASEAN. But of late, it is registering low levels of GDP growth and has history of buckling under international financial crisis. Ever since Asian financial crisis of 1998-99, Thai economy failed to regain its original momentum. Exports slid perceptibly, manufacturing sector failed to bounce back. Thai economy is now thriving on resurgent tourism and services sectors. By perpetually adopting “bamboo bending with the wind” kind of diplomacy, Thailand uniquely maintained its sovereignty and independence during the colonial and cold war era. Since 1945 Thailand shifted its orientation towards US. Boisterous economic and strategic rise of China has posed Thailand with a challenge of choosing between Washington and Beijing. With US retreating from this part of the World and an assertive China looming large over the region, Thailand was prompted to make a choice. China and Thailand established diplomatic relations in 1975 which steadily expanded with time. Though Thai military juntas had strong ties with Washington, America’s receding presence in South East Asia prompted Thai establishment to shift allegiances. Moreover, unlike other countries in the region, Thailand had no territorial disputes with China and hence Thailand eagerly joined hands with China. Till 1999, American has been major weapons supplier for Thailand. Thai currency plummeted during financial crisis as American purchases became more expensive. Thailand began to look for other affordable options and eventually settled for Chinese supplies setting stage for enhanced military engagement. Both countries began joint military exercises in 2005 marking 30 years of diplomatic relations. Since 2006, balancing of relations between China and US became difficult for Thailand. By 2009, China replaced US as Thailand’s largest export market and soon Chinese FDI dominated established investors from US, Japan and Europe. Thailand also experienced a surge in Chinese tourists by 12%.

Thailand’s relations with US further weakened after the US refused to recognize and endorse the military government following a coup in 2014. While the west was highly critical of military junta, China endorsed the coup. Burdened by a stagnant economy, military generals offered several concessions to China. Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha approved purchase of three submarines, 34 armored personnel carriers and 28 tanks worth $1billion from China (1). Gradually military cooperation has become corner stone of Sino-Thailand relations with Thailand’s boosted military spending after 2014 purchasing military hardware from China. In 2015, Thai and Chinese air forces conducted first joint exercises, and navies participated in joint drill “Blue Strike” in 2016. As US weaned away from Thailand to force military junta to reinstate democratic government, China reinvigorated its relations with Thailand. China eventually displaced Japan as Thailand’s largest investor in 2015. Cognizant of Thailand’s strategic location, which is dubbed as gateway to South east Asia, China vigorously rallied to boost its economic, trade, military with Thailand.

Thailand reciprocated China by repatriating Uighur militants and political dissidents in 2015. But China was irked by Thailand’s inordinate delay in approving the $5.5 billion high-speed rail project connecting China’s southern province of Kunming with Laos and Bangkok, a regional connectivity project under the BRI (Belt Road Initiative). Indicating its displeasure, China abstained from inviting Prime Minister Prayuth for the BRI summit at Beijing. Intimidated by diplomatic snub, Prayuth invoked the article 44, of Thai constitution, to circumvent the legislative body (parliament) and expedited the project. Through its “shame offensive tactics” China invariably compelled Thai government to fall in line.

China buoyed by geopolitical ambitions, determined to emerge as the regional superpower, unleashed quintessential tool of water diplomacy in South East Asia. Beijing revved up engagement with countries Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos and Thailand through which river Mekong flows. Mekong is dubbed as Amazon of Asia. In 1995, Thailand, Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam signed the Mekong River Commission (MRC) with Myanmar and China upstream countries as dialog partners. Interestingly, China the upper riparian country of Mekong evaded from being part of MRC but managed to have unparalleled control over the waters by constructing numerous dams along the course of river in its territory. Statistical reports indicate that China uses more than half of total waters of the river against 16% by the lower four riparian countries. China has dubious strategies for Mekong river. Aside, availing copious amounts of Mekong waters, obsessed with dam building China clinched numerous hydroelectric dam construction projects. Thus, Chinese companies besides enormously benefitting from infrastructure projects reaped dollars by selling electricity to respective countries. Unmindful of environmental concerns, China built several dams in all the four riparian countries despite mounting protests from locals. Stalling of the humongous Myitsone dam in Myanmar amidst growing protests by locals’ mirrors brewing anti-Chinese sentiments towards China financed dams. 

Apart from the financial benefits, China aspired to convert the longest flowing river into largest shipping lane for Chinese trade. To facilitate swift shipping cargo, China entered into agreement with Myanmar, Laos and Thailand for blasting rocks and reefs in Mekong river in 2000. Disregarding environmental concerns like changing of river course, destruction of aquatic habitat and reefs, China carried out first phase of blasting in 2002. But was forced to stop in 2003 as reef blasting potentially aggravated territorial dispute between Thailand and Laos. China’s dam building spree had reduced catchment areas for fishing, reduced water flows to downstream countries, caused displacement of several people and threatened their livelihoods. Reports now indicate that intense damming of Mekong river made the lower riparian countries flood-prone.

China’s renewed outreach towards Thailand’s military regime can be ascribed to Beijing’s intentions of developing the isthmus of Kra in Southern Thailand into an “international golden waterway”. Interestingly, ambitious Chinese idea found semblance with plans of retired Thai military generals, academicians, businessmen who revived the idea of building a long canal across Southern Thailand connecting Pacific Ocean with Indian Ocean. Indeed, Chinese military first elaborated on this idea in the Naval and Merchant Ships magazine published by China’s largest ship building conglomerate CSSC in late 2015 (2). For long China has been battling fears of choking of its imports at the narrow Malacca Strait in an event of regional escalations by the US. 80% of Chinese imports pass through this choke point. Dubbed as Malacca Dilemma, China aspires to surmount the fears of blockade by the US by bypassing the strait and routing its imports through narrow isthmus of Kra.  Kra links the Gulf of Thailand with Andaman Sea at same latitude as the island of Phuket. New reports indicate that China is keen on building Kra Canal, 135-kilometer-long, 450-meter-wide and 26-meter-deep. The proposed Kra canal would be 800 km south of Bangkok and 200km north of Thailand- Malaysia border. China right now is seriously contemplating on the incipient benefits of Kra canal over Malacca Straits which is the World’s busiest route but infested with pirates. Kra Canal route can reduce the travel time by two-three days or roughly 1200 kilometers.

As of now, Prime Minister Prayuth is opposed to proposal of Kra canal actively supported by the influential grouping of military which formed Thai Canal Association for Study and Development. It is working with Peking University in carrying out feasibility studies which are funded by a Chinese company. China is actively recruiting high power pro-Chinese Thai groups to intensively campaign for garnering public support. With apprehensions about the economic viability of Chinese investments looming large, sections of Thai community want that the project be internationally-funded. The estimated cost of canal development alone is $28 billion which is 8% of Thailand’s GDP and related infrastructure and special economic zone in the surrounding region would cost $22billion. Though the project can create 2.5 million jobs as Chinese financed projects come with an attached clause of employing Chinese personnel locals hardly stand a fair to make a living.

While the project can be a big boost to anemic Thai economy, public support is paltry. Thailand venerates traditional life style and strongly upholds ideas of environmental conservation. Besides, canal construction will have far-reaching implications on the security and sovereignty of Thailand as country will be divided into northern province with overwhelming Buddhist population and Southern province dominated by Malay-Muslims. Canal will create tensions among the ASEAN countries as Singapore might lose its business, indispensability and economic advantage. Development of this mega project will be replete with immense challenges and the hilly terrain of the region can pose formidable obstacles during construction. Above, all the canal will change the economic, financial and geopolitical arena of the region.

While the potential benefits of emerging as regional economic hub can bring prosperity to Thailand but returns are not assured and guaranteed. Unlike the Panama Canal or Suez Canal, Kra Canal has alternative transit route and hence recovering cost of investments will be long drawn. Also, unlike the OECD developmental assistance loans which have nominal interest Chinese loans have higher interest rates. With China’s appetite for resources sinking and economy showing signs of slowing down, shipping traffic might be less revenues may not be on expected lines.  In absence of robust returns from the Kra canal Loan repayment will be an upheaval task for Thailand. Singapore is internationally acclaimed smart transiting hub and to have preferential advantage over Singapore the new port must offer better services. Else it might lose the competitive advantage and go down history as yet another shining example of Chinese debt trap diplomacy. Moreover, with growing risk of conflicts between India and China, Kra Canal can become another region of consternation. In a plausible war like scenario China may not be averse to sending war ships through this canal towards Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

@ Copyrights reserved.