Indian Defence Review

The Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi with the Chinese Premier, Mr. Li Keqiang, at the Official Welcome Ceremony, at Great Hall of People, in Beijing, China on May 15, 2015.

According to a post on the Facebook, while Prime Minister Modi was visiting China, an Op-Ed in China’s Global Times stated, “Due to the Indian elite’s confidence in their democracy, and the inferiority of its ordinary people, few Indians are able to treat Sino-Indian ties accurately, objectively and rationally.”

In China, all media is government controlled, all journalist have to perforce be members of the All China Journalists Association (ACJA) and any journalist stepping out of the government line faces financial sanctions to jail sentences, depending on what he wrote and how it is viewed by the hierarchy. What is more relevant here is that China’s Global Post is virtually the official mouthpiece of the CCP. So while the reference to democracy by communist China is perfectly understandable, the remark about “inferiority of its (India’s) ordinary people” raises a certain stink, in sharp contrast to the opaque smiles of camaraderie directed by the Chinese officialdom.

Is China’s superiority complex reminiscent of Nazi Germany? Do we need to heed the warning by HJ Mackinder in his article “The Geographical Pivot of History”, The Geographical Journal, London, 1904 wherein he said, “Chinese might constitute the yellow peril to the world’s freedom ….”. Yes the 7th China-India Defense and Security Consultation in Beijing went off at Beijing in April and on May 25, China’s State Councilor Yang Jiechi met with National Security Adviser Ajit Doval of India in Moscow. But what are the real intentions of China while warning India to seek Chinese permission to help Vietnam in oil exploration and herself deploying missiles in Gilgit-Baltistan?

Recent reports in the Indian media about nine militant groups of northeast India combining under one umbrella with Chinese blessings are highly disconcerting.1 The media citing security sources reported that the nine militant groups including the NSCN-Khaplang and the ULFA faction led by Paresh Baruah, have come together to form a new unified front during a meeting held recently in Myanmar. The umbrella organization is reportedly being created as the “United National Liberation Front of West South East Asia”. This new grouping is dominated by militant organizations from Manipur, which refer to the northeastern region as “West South East Asia”.

What is significant to note is that Chinese intelligence has reportedly played an active role in encouraging the northeastern groups to come together on a common platform. Chinese intelligence operatives are active in the Sagaing region and weapons are often shipped to the northeastern groups through the China-Myanmar border. Though Khaplang, Chairman NSCN will be the nominal head of the new grouping, a key role will be played by Paresh Baruah, the chief of the ULFA who has opposed peace with Government of India talks all along. Besides the NSCN-Khaplang and ULFA, other groups that participated in the meeting held at Taga in Sagaing (Myanmar) in April 2015 were the Kangleipak Communist Party, Kanglei Yawol Kunna Lup, People’s Revolutionary Party of Kangleipak, People’s Liberation Army, United National Liberation Front and National Democratic Front of Bodoland (Songbijit faction).

It is but natural that Indian government sources would not comment on such news reports because of diplomatic niceties and the Chinese Government will deny it outright. But then previous Chinese activities can be used as a pointer.

In 2001, a research scholar reported in the Debka Files that during Mao Tse Tung’s time, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Liaison, a body of CCP, recruited and supported Third World extremist Maoist groups like in Nepal and Burma, the New People’s Army of Philippines, the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, Japanese Red Army, and  Shining Path in Peru.  It went on to say that that while not all those revolutionary movements survived, one that did is the Nepalese Maoist Communist Party of Nepal.

Chinese intelligence infiltration operations into Nepal, that began decades ago, set off a self-perpetuating Maoist “People’s War” that has never really ended and it would be in China’s interests to install a regime in Kathmandu that is not too friendly with the US or India.

In recent years, following developments reported in open sources are of significance which need to be pieced together:2

• PLA of Manipur was formed after a group Manipuri youth led by Biseshwar Singh travelled to China via Myanmar, got indoctrinated into Chinese communism and returned to India;3
• the PLA of Manipur and Maoists signed an MoU in 2008 assuring Maoists PLA trainers for camps in Jharkhand and allowing batches to be sent to the PLA’s base in Myanmar for joint training with the Manipuri rebels (on behest their Chinese mentors?);
• when the Royal Bhutanese Army routed the ULFA-Bodo camps in Eastern Bhutan, China provides shelter and support to ULFA on Chinese soil;
• three Chinese nationals were apprehended trying to sneak into India with fake India documents in a bid to meet Naga insurgents;
• Chinese weapons and communication equipment have been pouring into Maoists and northeast insurgent groups albeit China denies being the source;
• through communication intercepts, Paresh Barua was located living at Ruli in China last year, where he was obviously being entertained by Chinese intelligence agencies, and;4
• China has created her deadliest proxy in the United State Wa Army (USWA), perhaps more lethal than the LTTE, headquartered in Shan State of Myanmar even arming it with missile fitted helicopters, in addition to assault rifles, machine guns, shoulder fired air defence missiles and armoured vehicles.

The timing of the declaration of the “United National Liberation Front of West South East Asia” is significant since it comes post the March 2015 abrogation of the 14-year old ceasefire by Khaplang, Chairman of the NSCN (Khaplang) with Government of India and preceding Prime Minister Modi’s visit to China in May. It can hardly be construed mere signal to Mr Modi since the Chinese have reportedly promised to provide weapons and logistics to the new grouping as they want to keep things boiling in the northeast in view of their claim on the state of Arunachal Pradesh.

With all the talk about peace and economic development, and strong leadership of President Xi, it was hoped that China will shun the path of subterfuge. But it appears that Xi has decided to continue with the age old CCP path of hedging through asymmetric means. A scholar recently posted on Facebook, “It is also an open secret that militants in Kashmir are paid now by Chinese and not Pakistan. Chinese have established huge control over Kashmiri separatist leaders.” This certainly requires investigation.

The fact remains that at no cost China is carrying out a proxy war against India through Pakistan, tying down our security forces and diverting the much required development funds. With these new developments, we can expect rise in the northeast insurgency, an example of which we see exhibited in Arunachal Pradesh. Similarly, the China-Pakistan unholy nexus needs to be watched on other fronts as well. One example is Maldives with over 1000 uninhabited islands, which has been methodically radicalized through the LeT, which is a proxy both for China and Pakistan. It would be a folly to remain complacent to such developments.

The hedging strategy being adopted under President Xi will surely promote instability and we need to look at preventive measures. Definitely, Prime Minister Modi should have a direct talk with President Xi Jinping during his visit to China albeit much may not come of it under pretext of denial or the promise to “look into the issue”, not that anything like this could be happening without the direction and support of the CCP. At the same time, it would be prudent to review our own foreign policy, this being the age of asymmetric and sub-conventional war.5

The most effective foreign policy for any country, whatever its weight,   is one that balances realism and idealism – that in effect makes idealism realistic.  We seem to be relying only on idealism and therefore are perpetually at the receiving end.