Friendly but uneventful By U.C. Agarwal, (Former CVC)
The Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao’s visit to India last month though pleasing and friendly was by and large uneventful. It did not lighten, let alone remove the prevailing unpleasantness on account of the boundary disputes on the North-Eastern and North-Western border of India between the two countries.
On the North-Eastern border, China has been aggressively asserting its claim over Arunachal Pradesh. It has gone to the extent of objecting to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, top leaders and the Dalai Lama visiting the border State. On the North-Western border, Beijing is treating J&K as a disputed territory, not as a part of India.
Accordingly residents of Arunachal and J&K are given “stapled visa” for visiting China. Wherein, instead of stamping a visitor’s passport, the visa is issued on a separate paper. Needless to say this amounts to not recognizing India’s sovereignty over these States. This is not all. To please its all-weather ally Pakistan, the J&K portion of India’s border is not treated as the Indo-China border by Beijing.
Another matter of concern relates to the proposed construction of the 510 MW hydro-power project by China on the upstream of the inter-State Brahmaputra River, where it flows into India. Reportedly, a few other smaller water utilization projects are also being planned by Beijing therein.
Importantly, as India is a down-stream riparian country, New Delhi should have been duly consulted before China took up the mega and other power projects to ensure that these do not adversely affect Indian interests. Sharing of information and prior consultation before taking up projects on inter-State rivers is the normal international practice.
Since the Indo-China boundary disputes could adversely impact relations, Wen’s visit was expected to sort these out on a priority basis. The added advantage was Wen’s better knowledge and understanding of India. Justified by the speech he made at the Indian Council of World Affairs.
Not only did Wen quote from the Upanishads and Rabindranath Tagore’s famous book “Geetanjali,” .he made plain his great liking for Tagore. He referred to Mahatma Gandhi as “a great man, a man of love and integrity, who has always lived in my heart”. Along-with expressing his admiration for India for having been an “ardent advocate of restoring China’s lawful seat at the UN.”
This pertains to the 1949 period when the Peoples Liberation Army (PLA) under Mao-Tse-Tung’s Communist movement in the Chinese Civil War liberated mainland China after defeating Chiang Kai-Shek who withdrew to Chinese island Taiwan but still claimed to be the head of the Chinese State. India at that time supported Mao and strongly pleaded that China was entitled to the UN membership and it’s Security Council.
However, despite his friendly tones, Wen’s visit proved to be largely uneventful as decisions on important Indian concern were indefinitely postponed. Whereby, more discussions between officials of both countries were suggested to gain time. The Chinese Premier dubbed the boundary dispute as a “historical legacy,” which required patience and a long period to resolve. No time-frame was laid for finalizing the dispute.
Reportedly, Wen did not agree even, as an interim measure, to recognize the Indo-China boundary as de facto valid and Arunachal Pradesh and J&K to be Indian territories. The “stapled visa” issue too was unresolved and left to officials to discuss later. The Joint Communiqué on the boundary dispute states: “The two sides reiterated their firm commitment to resolving outstanding differences including the boundary question at an early date through peaceful negotiations….. Pending the resolution of the boundary question, the two sides shall work together to maintain peace and tranquility in the border areas in line with the previous agreement.”
Significantly, the communiqué is silent on the construction of the hydro-power project on the Brahmaputra River. It only blandly states, “The two sides noted the good cooperation between China and India in the fields of trans- rivers. The Indian side appreciated the flood-season hydrological data and the assistance in emergency management provided by the Chinese side. The two sides reiterated that they will promote and enhance cooperation in this field.”
With regard to trade and commerce between India and China there was some positive outcome. For example, both concurred on a higher bilateral trade target of US $ 100 billion by 2015 as against the current trade volume of $ 60 billion. Furthermore, Wen expressed his seriousness in reducing the Indo-China trade imbalance by giving more access to Indian IT and pharmaceutical firms in the Chinese market. Both sides also agreed to constitute an India-China CEO’s Forum to deliberate on business issues.
Moreover, some satisfactory cooperation in the educational sector too was visualized. The communiqué states, “Both sides recognized the importance of educational exchanges, including promoting wider knowledge of each other languages. In this context, the Chinese side welcomed the decision by the Central Board of Secondary Education to introduce Chinese as a foreign language in the curriculum of schools in India from the next academic session, April 2011….. the two countries agreed to consider the liberalization of an agreement on mutual recognition of degrees and diplomas.”
On two other matters of interest to India namely Pakistan-backed terrorism in India and support for the UN Security Council’s membership, Beijing’s response was halting and lukewarm. On terrorism, the communiqué stated in general terms: “Both sides underlined their unequivocal opposition to terrorism in all its forms and manifestations and stressed that there is no justification for any act of terrorisms anywhere. They committed themselves to countering terrorism through joint efforts that include disrupting the financing of terrorism.” But there is no mention of Pakistan’s role on 26/11 terrorist attack in Mumbai.
With regard to India’s membership of the UN Security Council, the communiqué reads, “China attaches great importance to India’s status in international affairs as a large developing country, understands and supports India’s aspiration to play a greater role in the United Nations, including in the Security Council.” However, it remains non-committal on supporting India’s claim for the Security Council’s membership. All Wen informally stated was that China might not stand in the way of India’s membership quest.
Some other conciliatory and friendly aspects of Premier Wen’s visit were on “India and China, being each other’s neighbour, have a shared interest in the stability, prosperity and security of the wider region. They agreed to intensify their dialogue on various aspects pertaining to this region and work together on realizing their common goals…..Both sides welcome the opening of the telephone hotlines between the Prime Minister of India and the Premier of China and regular consultations between them.”
In sum, as the joint communiqué underscores both sides recognize the importance of cultivating friendship with each other and maintaining regular contacts through high level visits. However, the main bone of contention between the two countries relating to boundary disputes remains unresolved indefinitely.
Thus even as Premier Wen’s visit might smoothen the way of Indo-China friendship in future but for now it was rather uneventful for failing to resolve the main troubling issues. The tone of friendship in the communiqué need to be followed by solid matching action. INFA