Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s statement at the all-party meeting on June 19 that “neither is anyone inside our territory nor is anyone of our post captured” led to intense questioning in the media whether Chinese ‘transgressions’ were being condoned by the PM. That was a misreading of PM’s remarks. Realising the sensitivity of the matter, the PMO issued a detailed clarification next day stating that the remarks were in the context of Galwan region. The Ministry of External Affairs also issued a strong statement on rebutting Chinese claims on the Galwan Valley.
Follow | India-China border tensions live updates
The controversy erupted because news-hungry 24x7 media and social media focused on only one aspect of the PM’s statement while ignoring the others including the MEA statements. The fact is that the PM’s statement was quite comprehensive, which if read in totality, would not have led to extreme interpretations.
The statement had indicated that 20 Indian soldiers had sacrificed defending the motherland. It was categoric that while India wanted peace and friendship, defending was ‘foremost’ task. Further, the armed forces have a free hand to take all necessary steps and the government was giving priority to the development of modern infrastructure in the area. The subsequent MEA statement rejected China’s exaggerated claims which were in contravention of the understanding reached between the military commanders on June 6.
Read together, it is clear that India was not conceding to China any of its claims and that India was taking all steps to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity.
The government’s statements have accepted that there have been ‘transgressions’ from the Chinese side and that the talks for ‘disengagement and de-escalation’ have been going on. While the government has not released specific details regarding Chinese transgressions in various areas, it is the right thing for the government to do particularly at a time when sensitive discussions are going on.
There has been no hiding or covering up of the situation. It is a separate matter that full details of the incidents may not be available. That is not unusual at the time of heightened tensions. The government has to be cautious in what it says. Understandably, there are many things which are not in the public domain at this moment.
The focus of the discussion in the country should be on how to deal with China and not to pick holes in the functioning of the government. The need of the hour is to build national resolve to fight the crisis. In a democracy, the government is answerable, no doubt. In due course, it will have to answer for all its actions. But, it is not essential that all the answers have to be given on demand of the media or political parties. Post mortems can wait.
It is heartening that most political parties gave complete support to the government and the armed forces to deal with the situation and did not press for immediate answers. The government should hold more such meetings in future. That will help to build unity and consensus in the country to deal with an aggressive China.
Understandably, emotions are inflamed right now. However, dealing with China cannot be based on rhetoric or emotions. A careful, dispassionate, objective analysis of the situation, own strengths and weaknesses need to be done to formulate a comprehensive response.
‘Face-offs’, ‘transgressions’, ‘intrusions’ are not uncommon on India-China border. But the present crisis is an inflexion point in Sino-Indian relations. It should make us take a realistic assessment of the bilateral relationship. Not having a clear and demarcated Line of Actual Control (LAC) has been the root cause of the problems. The Chinese position of sticking to an undefined LAC and focusing on only border management and confidence building measures rather than on resolving the boundary question has run its course. A new approach is needed.
India of 2020 is not the same India of 1962. Everyone, including China, understands it. While there is a difference between India and China in comprehensive national strength, that does not mean India is a pushover or it will give in to anybody’s bullying.
The nature of China’s challenge is well understood by the leadership as well as the armed forces. The general public has also become alert to the economic dimension of the China challenge. The calls for reducing imports of critical items from China has had resonance across the country.
Focus on diversification
While it may not be possible to disentangle the Indian economy from the Chinese economy immediately, it goes without saying that we need to focus on diversification. This may take some time. But it is not impossible. The prime minister’s call for a self-reliant India and building local brands is the right framework to deal with India-China economic relations.
We should also have a better understanding of the Chinese political structures, military system, economy and the mindset of the people. This can happen only if we acquire the language skills needed to know China. The government should encourage Chinese studies in the country.
There are several diplomatic measures which can be considered. Upgrading relations with Taiwan and giving more visibility to the Dalai Lama, talking about the human rights situation in Hong Kong and Xinjiang should be encouraged.
China’s assertiveness is palpable across the Indo-Pacific. The Government of India can also consider how to revitalise the Quad to discourage China from following a highly intrusive policy in the region. A coalition-building approach will be needed.
India China military stand-off is likely to be a long haul. We are entering into an uncharted territory insofar as bilateral relations are concerned. India wants good relations with China but cannot compromise on its sovereignty and territorial integrity. The power differential between India and China cannot be denied but at the same time, India cannot afford to be intimidated by China. China has many faultlines which need to be understood.
Our focus should be on infrastructure building, proactive diplomacy, use of consumer power, diversification of supply chains etc. A coordinated strategy to deal with China is needed. The suggestions of the sceptics should also be taken into consideration.
(The writer is Former Deputy National Security Advisor)