DRAGON TALES: The fragility of Indo-China ties was brought home by the Chinese ambassador’s Arunachal remarks.
New Delhi: India and China on Tuesday agreed to double bilateral trade by 2010 to $ 40billion. Five MoUs, four agreements, three protocols and one exchange programme were signed between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Chinese President Hu Jintao.
The countries also agreed to a 10-point strategy to strengthen strategic relations and 48 points in a joint declaration. They will set up a consulate each: one in Kolkata and the other in Guangong.
But what do these agreements amount to? Will, as Manmohan Singh put it, “friendship be the underlying theme of cooperation”? Will Hindi-Chini ever be Bhai Bhai again?
These were the questions Vidya Shankar Aiyar asked on CNN-IBN’s show Face the Nation to Centre for Policy Research’s strategic affairs expert Brahma Chellany, senior correspondent of Asia Weekly, Wang Jianmin and Delhi University Professor, Sreemati Chakrabarti
Increasing India-China bilateral trade was treated as urgent, progress on the boundary dispute was only appreciated and the special representatives asked to merely accelerate efforts. So where is the substance behind all the smiles?
“The visit was rich in symbolism but rather low on enduring substance. I think it is important to know from the Prime Minister’s own statement that India has some concerns-one on the border issue. The PM called for focussed, sincere and problem-solving approach on these territorial disputes. In other words India was signalling at the talks that has been going on since 1981 continuously, have not really made substantial progress,” Chellaney said.
Another point that the Prime Minister made was that it is time to ensure that the progress in bilateral is made irreversible. One would have thought that after three decades of incremental progress in Sino-India relations that the Sino-Indian relation was stable and durable.
But the fragility of that relationship was brought home by the Chinese ambassador’s and other Chinese officials’ belligerent statements in recent days. So it is another exercise and full of symbolism?
“Yes, by and large I agree but I think too much of emphasis on the border is unnecessary. It’s unrealistic in the sense that the past has been so complicated. It has relations with the colonial period, the history and so many issues. The fact that there were two major civilizations in India and China, peacefully co-existing with each other and some buffer states and some frontier states lying in between where there was no single which divided India and China,” said Prof Chakrabarti:
But Chakrabarti also brought attention to the fact that both the countries have agreed to have consulates in more places. “It is still trade driven and will remain like that for some more years,” she said.
But what is the Chinese take on the issue?
“I think it is good news for both countries. I agree with Prof Chkrabarti that the 1962 border war is over and nearly 40 years have passed since then. And we Chinese always say that let bygones be bygones,” said Wang Jianmin.
“They surely are doing something (to solve the boundary dispute). India and Chinese people are wise enough and they can solve the problem,” he said.
While Jianmin expressed optimism, Chellany felt it was many opportunities were missed in the historic meeting.
“The fact is that we have a first visit by a Chinese President in 10 years but there was no breakthrough on the issues that divide India and China. I would see that as a missed opportunity. More importantly I see the visit as sending the wrong signals to India. A President is combining his visit to India with a stop in Pakistan where he will sign some very important agreements of great strategic significance. During his stop, Quadar, which is a Chinese-based commercial court, will be opened and its significance in the Chinese foreign ministry is no less than the 1969 opening of the Karakoram Highway,” he said.
Chowmein versus Chaat
Will it always be about Chinese food and culture that India and China will be happy about?
“I think one has to bear in mind the Indo-China relationship is a complex one because in history the contact between the two civilisations is more one sided. Culture, religion, medicine went from India to China and we always had this buffer, Tibet that disappeared in 1950 bringing the military frontiers of India and China together for the first time. Within 12 years of that we had a war. The issue of history is an important issue because we are reminded every now and then by the Chinese that this is an unresolved issue. The Chinese ambassador who woke up Indians last week to this reality,” Chellaney said.
And how is Indian food treated in China? “We have more and more Indian restaurants in China, Beijing and Shanghai and Guangzhou. I personally like Indian food. My ex-girl friend is an Indian in US. Indian and Chinese can be good friends,” said Jianmin
Will the Chinese side to say anything to that nuclear suppliers group support that India needs?
“I am surprised that the Chinese would not support the lifting of nuclear export controls on India. After all for many years, China has condemned the NPT (Nuclear Proliferation Treaty). And for China now to be more Catholic than the Pope on the NPT, to emphasise non-proliferation over all other issues, and not support the nuclear supply group making an exemption is a bit surprise for India,” Chellaney said.
"Indian and Chinese can be good friends but why is there no progress on other issues of India and China?" questioned Vidya Shankar Aiyar.
He asked Professor Charabarti that there was talk about UN Security Council permanency but China still clearly didn’t want to say that it supports India’s permanent seat in the Security Council, it only understands India’s aspiration for the position, why is this?
"The Chinese will not rush to support India. India and Japan tried for the seat together and China has major objections because of the fear of Japan because what Japan has left in history in China is very strong. In private conversations they have told Indian officials that if we were not with the Japanese we would have supported your case. So let India try once more. We should not expect instant results for your problems," said Professor Chakrabarti.
Vidya Shankar Aiyar wanted to know the professor's opinion on the fact that the actual problem seem to be the way India and China define time - what India calls an instant is many years for the Chinese.
"It is a question of perception. I thing if we come close to each other in areas where we can co operate and leave the areas of confrontation for the time being, that itself will be a big achievement," said Professor Chakrabarti.
The next question that came up was what is the confrontation in being the permanent member of the Security Council and what is the confrontation for requiring support for civilian nuclear energy support?
In the Joint Declaration China doesn’t say that it wants to support India in the nuclear supplies group
Wang Jianmin said that the Joint Declaration says that it shall take efforts to promote cooperation in the fields of nuclear energy and that, he felt, was sufficient.
But Brahma Chellany disagreed saying that if it was sufficient, then the Chinese would not have made their stands known. "For example the Chinese ambassador wasn’t shy to assert China’s claims on Arunacjal Pradesh. So there is no reason fore them to take a clear cut stands on India’s desire to be a permanent member of the UN Security Council or to see nuclear export controls against India lifted. Going back to the events of 1950s, what is very revealing from Nehru’s own papers is that the Americans and then the Soviets offered India a permanent seat on the UN Security Council in place of China and Nehru turned it down by saying that it will spoil India’s relationship with China. And today the Chinese are not even willing to support India’s candidacy," he said.
But despite the fact that India was the second non-communist state to recognise the existence of the People's Republic of China in 1949, ‘Will Hindi-Chini ever be Bhai Bhai again?’
Brahma Chellany did not think so but Wang Jianmin and Sreemati Chakravarti were more optimistic and felt that the two countries would reconcile their differences eventually.
SMS poll results: ‘Will Hindi-Chini ever be Bhai Bhai again?’
Yes - 28 per cent.
No - 72 per cent.
Source: IBN LIVE
