Pakistan, China’s fulcrum for promoting the string of pearls in South Asia may not be as effective any longer because of related developments centering on Afghanistan. But Islamabad has not been given up, though Beijing today finds that its silent support to Pakistan’s Islamic terrorist assets against India is beginning to impact China’s Muslim separatist in Xinjing. Beijing has made inroads into Sri Lanka. But the Island nation has its limitations.
The importance of this Chinese move to India’s relations with the north-eastern neighbourhood needs no emphasis. In the long run the Chinese move may be connected to India’s ‘Look East’ policy.
The weak links discovered by Beijing are Bhutan and Nepal. The Himalayan states and the Indo-Himalayan belt always attracted by China as soft power projections against India – winning a war without firing a bullet. It has nurtured anti-India forces in Nepal for years, taking advantage of small country antipathy against a big neighbour. India’s arrogant diplomacy periodically, only back fired. A section virulently anti-India among Nepalese politicians and media has been studiously nurtured by Beijing.
Bhutan and China do not enjoy diplomatic relationship. They have a serious border territorial issue. But official contacts are maintained to resolve the issue, while some trade takes place. But there are those in Bhutan who look at India as a hegemon controlling their life.
In fact, the 1949 Indo-Bhutan treaty virtually made Bhutan an Indian principality. Bhutan agreed to be guided by the advice of the Indian government in regard to its international relations. India’s aid made the most part of Thimpu’s budget. As the country came of age, aspirations of an independent state developed.
This was natural and in tune with the trends of the world. In the 2007 revised treaty, the above article was revised to establish close co-operation between the two countries and not to allow use of their respective territories for activities harmful to the national security and interests of each other. All reference to Bhutan’s external relations was deleted.
This was an astute diplomatic and strategic decision from New Delhi. Bhutan was free to execute its foreign relations independently.
The next steps in China-Bhutan relations promise some interesting propositions for India-China relationship. Bhutan’s Prime Minister Jigmi Y. Thinlay met Chinese premier Wen Jiabao at the Rio + 20 summit in Beijing on June 21. This should not have been a surprise as Bhutan was encouraged by India to seek its foreign policy interests.
More importantly, according Bhutan official website, Mr. Thinley discussed with Mr. Wen bilateral issues including Bhutan’s bid for a non-permanent seat on UN Security Council for the term 2013-14. This was interpreted as Bhutan seeking China’s support. But the Chinese Foreign Ministry website made no mention of this.
Following, Chinese Vice Foreign Minister responsible for South Asia, Ms. Fu Ying was in Bhutan from August 9 to 11, for the 20th round of China-Bhutan boundary talks. Expectedly, there was no progress in the talks with the two sides sticking to their positions.
…Beijing is not only trying bring Bhutan out of India’s influence, but also pushing itself into India’s immediate neighbourhood and sensitive relationships.
What was important was Ms. Fuying’s speech on arrival in Thimpu. After laboring over China’s admiration for Bhutan’s rich cultural heritage and shared history with China, she came to the specifics. Early establishment of diplomatic relations, building bridges of friendship and cooperation, and supporting Bhutan’s international aspirations. What should not be missed in Ms. Fu Ying’s speech are the following: (i) Bhutan was well placed to benefit from the development of China and India, and (ii) she related a Bhutanese folk tale where a partridge, rabbit, monkey and elephant forged a harmonious relationship fulfilling their wishes together. The reference was obviously to Nepal, Bhutan, China and India.
On to Kathmandu from Bhutan on an official visit, Ms. Fu Ying told Nepal Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai that “Unity between China, India, Bhutan and Nepal could be valuable for the entire region”. She further added “China is not India’s competitor. We want to maintain cooperative relations with India”. (The Telegraph, Nepal, August 14).
China perceives Nepal as a strategic neighbor closely tied in its security and threat calculations. Beijing has established relations with all the major political parties of Nepal, and hoped to marginalise Indian influence in Nepal. But the recent split in Nepal’s largest political party, the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoists) UCPN(M), on which Beijing was banking on mainly, has disturbed the Chinese strategy. The hardline pro-China split group calling itself CPN (Maoists) led by Mohan Baidya (Kiran) is viscerally anti-India. Baidya visited China for ten days in July at the invitation of the Chinese Communist Party’s International Department.
On his return from China (July 25) Baidya declared the Chinese leaders were worried that “federalism” in any from may lead to the disintegration of the nation and rise of foreign influence, and that was not acceptable to China. The reference was emphatically to India. But China is also concerned about US and European influence in Nepal who, they believe, use Nepali territory to promote Tibetan separatism in Tibet. From China’s strategic view point, Nepal must be brought under Chinese influences to safeguard security and territorial integrity. China suspects that the USA at least is riding on India’s influence in Nepal.
Consolidation of the Indo-Himalayan border remains a priority for China. Beijing refused to recognize Sikkim’s accession to India till 2005 on the ground that India took over Sikkim by force. Visiting India in 2005, Premier Wen Jiabao gave the assurance to Indian leaders that China had changed their policy, and showed a map indicating Sikkim as a part of India. But questions still remain. Soon after Premier Wen’s India visit, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman stated in Beijing that the Sikkim issue will be resolved along with the boundary issue. Official Chinese maps have not yet been published incorporating this change.
It appears China has embarked on, or testing, a new strategy without discarding the exisiting policies. Vice Minister Fu Ying’s visit has initiated a debate in Bhutan on relations with India and China. Some feel Chinese will deliver Thimpu from international hermitage. For India, it time to lead Bhutan by hand to the international playing field following up from the 2007 amendment in the India-Bhutan treaty.
More important is the scenario that with the new template of “India, China, Bhutan, Nepal” cooperation, Beijing is not only trying bring Bhutan out of India’s influence, but also pushing itself into India’s immediate neighbourhood and sensitive relationships.
The importance of this Chinese move to India’s relations with the north-eastern neighbourhood needs no emphasis. In the long run the Chinese move may be connected to India’s ‘Look East’ policy. The discussions and developments on connectivity between Nepal and Bhutan with Bangladesh through Indian territory in which India is a natural participant is the making of new economic and development frame work. It is poised to create this Asian connectivity through Bangladesh, Myanmar and Thailand linking South East Asia. The project has huge potential for all the concerned countries taking India’s profile to the region claimed by China as its backyard. Therefore, neutralizing or even balancing India among the Himalayan states will be a major success for China in containing India.
Preparing for the visible military threat from China is of high importance. The issue cannot be ignored any longer. India’s defense development and deployment is India’s business for its security. Chinese comments, though till now mainly through these propagandas apparatus, amounts to interference in India’s internal affairs.
Notwithstanding the visible challenge, the invisible challenge is far more threatening to India’s development. New Delhi must urgently find ways to respond.
Please wait...
Yes i agree with China’s white papers saying only Military strength can ensure peace,That’s why we need to do anything to build our Military strong with latest weapons,Then we going to see who’s looking to our territory with dirty eyes.Indian politicians should learn a lesson from our neighbors.
As an Indian I favour conceding yje Indian North East to China since India is losing it to Bangladeshi Muslim colonisation anyway. Chinese rule may protect the Hindus and Buddhists in the area frpm Islamic tyranny. I have lost faith in India’s ability to do so.
“Tibet is being militarized aggressively. Old airports have been renovated. Advanced aircraft including SU-27 have been located in Gonga Airport along with Surface-to-Air anti-aircraft missiles.” – Due to high altitude with greatly reduced atmospheric pressure in Tibet, PLA Air Force is at a great dis-advantage to go in action with respect to IAF which has ground level bases say in Tezpur. Explicitly, this implies PLA SU-27 could only carry minimal weapons load or next to nothing to be strategically effective.
It is a great article. However, you missed role of the “Business class & politicians” through out the world that wants to buy substandard cheap chinese goods and labor and market it to their own people for a large profit, there by destroying the local economies, and jobs, and helping china rise. These business/men include people/Company like Steve Jobs(Apple), USA(Defence Industries contractors)and ordinary footpath vendors in third world. These people/Company would do anything for the large-profit margins and should be considered no better than high priced prostitutes. Without these prostitues, the China(pimp) would not be.
Once Romney is elected the stratigic position of China will change. America is well aware that the Chi-Coms are manipulating their currency to America’s disadvantage. The USA hasn’t had a political leader with the will to change that.
After November 06 we will.
The USA can destabilize China when ever it wants to. Either by tariff or preventing shipment of goods to the USA. That will give the Chi-Coms bigger problems then stealing land from their neighbors.
China is not a superpower, not even a great power. They are a 3rd world nation with a lot of people. India has almost as many people and builds it’s own weapons.
China doesn’t.
I doubt that China will go to war with India. They have to know that the UN will not survive that, no matter who ‘wins’. They also understand that the USA and Israel will back India. Not with troops but with weapons and intelligence. Maybe some air power.
Any attack through the mountains will be decided by air power. The aircraft are about the same. It will be the pilots, the tactics and the logistics that determine the outcome.
Celer, Silens, Mortalis.