By Manik Mehta
While economic ties between China and India received a strong boost during Chinese President Hu Jintao’s first-ever state visit to India last November, the visit failed to allay deep-rooted suspicions and resentments that Indians have nursed since the two countries fought a three-week border war in 1962.
These suspicions were revived shortly before Hu’s visit, when the Chinese ambassador in New Delhi, Sun Yuxi, broke protocol and blatantly told the Indian government through an interview with CNN-IBN that Arunachal Pradesh, a state in India’s northeastern region, is “Chinese territory.”
With politicians of the opposition Bharatiya Janta Party reacting angrily to Sun’s comments, India’s External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee told the upper house of the Indian parliament that China was, in fact, illegally occupying some 38,000 square kilometers of Kashmir territory. Moreover, under a border agreement of 1963 with China, Pakistan had also illegally ceded 5,180 square kilometers of Indian territory in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir to China, Mukherjee said. China continued to occupy some 90,000 square kilometers in the northeastern region of India.
The timing of the ambassador’s remarks, a few days before Hu’s arrival, was widely debated amongst Indian experts, who felt the outburst was meant to caution his Indian hosts against expecting a quick settlement of the politically sensitive border dispute and instead to concentrate more on improving economic ties.
Economic relations between the two countries have blossomed over recent years and are expected to continue to grow, driven by the needs of raw-material hungry China and the dynamic economic growth of India. From some US$260 million in 1990, bilateral trade surged to nearly US$8 billion in 2003 and is expected to reach US$20 billion in the current fiscal year and perhaps as high as US$30 billion by 2010.
hough Indian and Chinese companies have not yet made large investments in each other’s country, experts say that situation could change soon. Nevertheless, Indians echo the universal complaint about China’s lack of transparency, such as the subsidies Chinese companies obtain through a labyrinth of murky channels. Indian officials, like their Western counterparts, say there is a need for transparency in how the Chinese price their products and the benefits they get from their government, as well as their World Trade Organization compliance, customs regulations and tariff policies.
Indian corporations are also not satisfied with the quality of products supplied by China, saying that China offers better-quality products to Western markets than to Asian countries, such as India.
India’s distrust of China was further fueled by its support for India’s rival, Pakistan. Pakistan receives arms and nuclear technology from the PRC, and many Indians suspect it is being tacitly encouraged to sustain its conflict with India, despite Beijing’s official welcome of the recent thaw between the two South Asian rivals. Like New Delhi, Washington is equally unhappy over the prospect, given Pakistan’s record of selling nuclear technology to rogue states and organizations with questionable agendas.
China has its own list of complaints against India. Due to national security concerns, New Delhi objects to China making acquisitions of “strategic assets,” such as ports and telecommunications. Another problem is that Chinese nationals have difficulty obtaining visas.
Beijing also bristles over India offering a safe haven to the Dalai Lama’s government-in-exile and thousands of Tibetans who keep the Tibetan flag flying from Dharamsala in northeastern India. As long as the Dalai Lama is alive, the Tibetans’ struggle for freedom will be active in India.
It is no secret that China would like to see the Dalai Lama and his followers expelled from India. If India did that under Chinese pressure, it would face domestic and international outcry and be branded a weak state that succumbed to the will of its giant neighbor. It would also be making a major strategic blunder by surrendering the only trump card it has held against China’s ambitions in the Himalayan region. Many Indian strategists are concerned that the recent opening of a rail link connecting China with Lhasa will be used to tighten China’s grip on Tibet and strengthen Chinese presence on India’s borders.
These strategists say that Tibet is China’s Achilles’ heel, and India should keep the Tibetan card close to its chest. China’s Communist regime understands the language of brinkmanship, not of appeasement. One example of this occurred eight years ago when India conducted nuclear tests and Indian Defense Minister George Fernandes said the tests were necessary to counter the “Chinese threat,” a charge that put China on the defensive as it tried to refute Fernandes’ statement.
Another major source of unease for China is the presence of the world’s largest democracy right next door. Despite all the imperfections and shortcomings of India’s political system, elections are held and free speech and criticism are allowed. The existence of two such glaringly different systems adjacent to each other posts a sharp contrast.
