As long as animosity continues to exist between India and China, Pakistan will remain an important player in China’s security calculus. India and China must narrow their differences and cooperate with each other rather than compete to justify the 21st century as one led by Asia
The nation is once again discussing China’s decision to block efforts at the United Nations to ban Jaish-e-Muhammed (JeM) chief Masood Azhar for the fourth consecutive time. Predictably, China’s intransigence has led to collective anger, talk of economic squeeze and a political slugfest resulting in a division on matters of national security.
In diplomatic terms, China has put the proposal on “technical hold,” a strategy it had adopted before. It allowed time to lapse and finally terminated it. The hold can last up to a maximum of nine months after which China can again use its veto power. There was a renewed hope that after the BRICS 2018 declaration, and the fact that four out of five permanent members in the Security Council were backing the proposal, China would not put any spoke in the wheel. JeM’s owning the responsibility for the very recent Pulwama terror attack, which had drawn unilateral criticism from the international community, including Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia and the UAE, had also kindled hope that China would not like to be seen holding a view contrary to the international community in its quest of becoming a global power. But to humour its ally, which is key to its access to the Gwadar port and which turns a blind eye to its Uighur Muslims, China bolted from taking global action. India was eagerly awaiting the decision of the UN’s 1267 Al Qaeda Committee because a ban under it would have led to a freeze on Azhar’s assets and a travel and arms ban, denting the capability of Jaish.
China’s move has set off a full-blown political controversy, with the Opposition labelling it as a failure of the Modi government’s foreign policy. But should we be playing politics in matters of national security without knowing the whole truth? A dispassionate look at the entire episode would suggest a victory for India’s foreign policy since for the first time, an unprecedented number of countries, including the four permanent members of the Security Council, were in favour of designating Azhar a global terrorist. Fourteen of the 15 United National Security Council members backed the proposal for Azhar’s designation as a global terrorist. The draft was co-sponsored by Australia, Bangladesh, Italy, Japan — all non-members of the Security Council. India’s anger and dismay is justified but today it has a bigger cushion of support.
China has a very clear strategic vision and its intent and policy have complete convergence as far as its global interests are concerned. It is clear that the country is using its soft power to act against India’s interests as Pakistan requested it to in pursuance of mutual strategic objectives. China’s strategic interests demand an access to the Indian Ocean and an alternative to Sea Lanes of Communications (SLOCs), passing through the vulnerable South China Sea. The key to both lies with Pakistan in the form of the Gwadar Port, which has become a necessity for China for furthering its influence in Asia and Africa as well. Moreover, in consonance with Chanakya’s teaching of “enemy’s enemy is your best friend,” Pakistan foots the bill and provides China an ideal “proxy” against India. This clarifies to an extent the reason behind China’s behaviour vis-à-vis Azhar, who is a mere pawn in a much bigger game. China is not repeatedly bailing out the dreaded terrorist but is coming to the rescue of its trusted ally —Pakistan — which stares at the possibility of being designated a “terror state.”
There is no doubt that China and India do not enjoy the best of neighbourly relations and have an unsettled border dispute, with China already in illegal occupation of Indian territory and staking claim for more. Pakistan in any case is an avowed enemy of India and considers it a quintessential threat. Humiliated by the shameful defeat suffered by its army in 1971 resulting in its bifurcation, Pakistan has unleashed a proxy war against India with terror as an instrument of its state policy. It, therefore, forms an ideal partner of China in the region. As long as animosity continues to exist between India and China, Pakistan will remain an important player in China’s security calculus.
Moreover, as part of China’s ambitious Belt and Road Initiative, it has made multi-billion dollar investments in Pakistan, which India is objecting to. China has repeatedly tried to convince India that the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is not India-centric but is a project of economic cooperation aimed at ushering prosperity, peace and stability in the region. India opposes on the issue of “sovereignty” since it runs through the territory of PoK. China at no cost is going to let its investment go waste and for that, it needs to keep Pakistan in good humour. China claims that it has no hegemonic designs in the region. By keeping terrorists like Azhar and others under its protection, China ensures peace at its CPEC project (a quid pro quo).
Another possible reason is that China is worried by India’s vigorous efforts to upgrade and build infrastructure on the Indo-China border. Raising of the mountain strike corps is one such thorn in the flesh. It would, therefore, like Indo-Pakistan relations to remain in turmoil and hostile so that the government of India’s renewed attention towards developing the Indo-China border remains diverted, as well as its adverse effect on the growing Indian economy.
Interestingly, JeM is already a banned organisation and China should have no objection to declaring its chief as a global terrorist. But China has always had a dubious policy regarding terror and support to rogue nations. Its support of North Korea and its despot ruler is a case in point. China has tried to justify its stand by stating that the case against Azhar lacks unanimity. It is a vague argument to circumvent adverse international media. As far as the BRICS declaration is concerned, China’s stand is that its move is not in contradiction to its policy in the context of the BRICS declaration as the member states have not entered into any such agreement. Only banned organisations were discussed during the summit and not individuals as per the Chinese assertion. China considers it is fully justified in putting the proposal on “technical hold” on the plea that it would allow more time to the Committee and its members to examine the entire issue and evolve a consensus.
It is in the interest of global peace that India and China must narrow their differences and cooperate with each other rather than compete to justify 21st century as the century led by Asia. China also knows that as years pass by, it would be difficult to beat back India with its military power and, therefore, would resort to soft power. China has a huge trade surplus of $52 billion (2017-18) with India. Whether we can afford a trade war with China is an issue which must be deliberated and analysed in detail before rushing into any emotion-based decision. This is where the skills of Indian diplomacy would be put to a severe test. Once, the strategic interests of India and China converge, Pakistan will diminish from the latter’s security calculus.
(The author is a Jammu based political commentator, columnist, security and strategic analyst)
