As China extended the technical hold on the proposed ban of Masood Azhar by UN, it seems China had not forgotten the significance of India.
Well, relations between China and India were at the nadir since ’62 till Subramanian Swamy initiated dialogue with the support of Narasimha Rao. It was the time, China moved from being a Communist nation following Communist doctrine to a Communist nation that follows Capitalist doctrine.
And Narasimha Rao ushered India into the Capitalist regime, keeping the democratic framework intact. Over a period of time, if Indian economics have become a model for democratic capitalism, China taught the world how to use the Communist framework to enhance Capitalism.
And China had become more practical, for it has no restraints that are inherent to the democracy. In a way, China unleashed the undisturbed terror network of communism on opponents, when they threatened to destabilize either the strong communist infrastructure or the capitalistic policies that deviated from the basic tenets of communism.
India, on the other hand to worry about the opposition from all and sundry and the hypocrisy that is well entrenched in the democratic framework. Well, everyone opposes something when they were in the opposition, only to change their views when in power. And it applies almost to everyone. Finally, any policy would be implemented in India depending on the straightness of the spine of Prime Minister.
Though China had learnt the fact that international diplomacy should be done from only a position of strength, India recognized the fact very lately, in fact only after the new nationalist government came to power. Still, India had miles to go to reach the position of China in global politics.
Though India suffers the baggage of the NAM days, because of which India is still struggling to enter UNSC, the economic reforms by Rao had catapulted India into the unexpected orbits that gave a variety of leverages.
The ever increasing apprehensions in the west over the rise and rise of China’s clout in world economics, manufacturing had tilted the scales in India’s favour in the eyes of the west and the credit goes to the much condemned democratic framework that still functions in India.
Coming to the local politics of south-east Asia, the equation between India and China, though have progressed from where they were till the eighties, have been oscillating like a pendulum.
China needs Pakistan for its strategic interests and Indian market for clearing its over produced products. Internationally, China was trying to compete with India in the service sector, but could not catch up, not because of any deficiencies in the people but for the state policies on transparency.
Though in the past China had not given much importance to its relations except treating it an ever expanding market, in the last few years it appears China was seen trying to strike a balance between its relations with India and Pakistan. Even in the last month, when tensions in the subcontinent rose to new heights, China maintained equal and safe distance between both subcontinental rivals.
China had extended technical hold on Masood Azhar being designated as an international terrorist. Though this was expected by one and all, when the news of India posed to reconsider the Indus Water Treaty, suddenly there was this news of China blocking water of one of Brahmaputra’s tributary. And it was well publicised by Pakistan and Indian media. The news died down suddenly with the same speed at which it was publicised.
If Pakistan considers publicising the news as a bigger threat India may have to face if it reconsiders the IWT, there was no official response from the Indian side except the routine one like – ‘It would be discussed with China’.
All the while, in the private circles of nationalist citizens of India, there was the talk of avoiding Chinese produce. Though it is easy to talk and difficult to practice, given the lower cost of Chinese produce, Indian Government can always try to meddle in between by imposing or increasing import duties. It is another matter that China may refer the issue to WTO and get the decision reversed. Still China loses approximately one year revenue in those segments, where GoI acts.
Well, China is now trying to pre-empt escalation of Brahmaputra tributary blocking to dominate its relations.
Nearly two weeks after the news dominated, the official media of China had discounted the fears of India regarding the construction of dam and blocking the tributary. And they did the job well.
The reasoning given for allaying the fears was both technical and political. It was explained that the water being blocked is only 0.02 percent of annual runoff of Brahmaputra. The political explanation given was how other downstream nations may be panicked if China blocks water. Of course, it doesn’t mean they would not do it, but only informs that for the time being they are not considering this as an option to threaten India.
The significant comment in the entire write-up was squarely blaming one section of Indian media. Well, having a democratic set-up comes with its own lacuna and one of them was to have people and organizations that always function against the Government and sometimes against the nation itself.
The way Indian politicians like Arvind Kejriwal, Sanjay Nirupam and Rahul Gandhi spoke on the surgical strikes belittling the Indian Army made the otherwise clown looking Bilawal Bhutto appearing a seasoned statesman.
China, on its part has explained their side. Like any intelligent nation, they keep all options open, but inform there would be no immediate threat over Brahmaputra waters. In their set-up that functions in only one dimension, this could be considered the final clarification.
Now, it is in the interests of India that our media stop over discussing all topics with all and sundry and spread panic.
The fact that our Indian media is being accused by China of spreading panic may be noted by all those rumor mongers, who work against the basic tenets of independent media that was called the fourth estate.
Of course, last year Pakistani Government had advised their media not to learn from their Indian counterparts, but learn the art of journalism from the west.
It is high time for Indian media to do some serious introspection.
