India Rising? The China Syndrome - an essay

The China Syndrome

The China Syndrome is the euphemistic name for concoction of admiration, envy, trepidation and competion with which India perceives the arousal of the dragon to its north. It’s possible to observe the ongoing changes in this region as a result of the Chinese phenomenon, both at the level of global geopolitics and internal perceptions in India.

The 21st century has been predicted by many to be the Asian Century, dominated by two giants, China and India, who, between them, are home to a third of the world’s population. Both countries have been growing at meteoric rates, and are moving from a socialist, closed economy to a free-market global economy. This has resulted in greater mutual respect and understanding between the two countries, along with increased co-operation and trade.

However, the presence of two powers in the same region inevitably results in competition, a struggle for valuable resources and influence, and the occasional conflict. Many political analysts point out to the existence of a new “Great Game” being played between China and India, with Russia and the US as more indirectly involved parties. The term refers to the late 19th century diplomatic battle of wits between the Russian and British Empires for control over Tibet and Central Asia.

In this essay, I describe the nature and effects of the China Syndrome as perceived from India. I first describe some instances of co-operation, and then move on to perceived nature of the great geopolitical chessboard in this part of the world. Finally, I describe some of the effects of the China Syndrome on Indian social, economic and political structure.

Section 1: An Asian Century? Co-operation between India and China

China and India have historical connections over the centuries: from Buddhist scholars and merchants traveling the Silk Route on land, to maritime trade via the Malacca Straits. However, over the 20th century, the borders between the two countries have been a serious bone of contention, with a war in 1962 which China won decisively. Both countries have acquired nuclear capability over the latter half of the 20th century, and have powerful standing armies.

China started its liberalization process about ten years ahead of India. Like India, a culture emphasizing education and social responsibility, China had a large pool of qualified, young people. Unlike India, China’s communist society attempted to address many of its social issues such as population and gender equality, speeding up the growth process when it began. China is now the “workshop of the world” in manufacturing, and rapidly expanding in scientific and intellectual research and pursuits. India, with its large English-speaking population, has cornered the niche for outsourcing services, and IT business, for now.

Increasing trade

Over the last couple of years, a series of high-level talks and visits are resulting in increasing volumes of trade between India and China. As a result of these talks, new pragmatic approaches are being taken by leaders from both countries. For instance, the Nathu La pass in the Indian state of Sikkim, which so far was claimed by China, is purported to be opened and a highway infrastructure developed to trade with China. Several Indian companies have set up shop in China, IT companies such as Infosys in particular. The volume of trade between the two countries is predictid to increase rapidly, as China demands more raw materials and minerals to satisfy its hungry people and machines.

(Partial) resolution of border issues.

In a recent visit of Indian PM Vajpayee to China, India signaled its readiness to give up its claim to the Aksai Chin area of Kashmir, and also declared Tibet to be an “inalienable” part of China. China, in turn, signaled its acceptance of Sikkim as a part of India. The Indian PM was roundly criticized by many for having given up too much in the bargain, especially since the dispute over Arunachal Pradesh was not addressed to India’s favor. China considers AP as “Southern Tibet”, and hence a part of China, and it is shown as part of China in its official maps.

In more recent talks, China has shown its willingness to consider the Line of Control (McMahon Line) as a border, but still demanded “negotiations based on cultural considerations”. This is probably a tactic to buy time and push the issue on the backburner (the “Vajpayee” doctrine, as some call it), but diplomats on both sides make noises about resolving the issues with increasing frequency.

Owing to both the nuclear deterrence and entwining trade between the two countries, analysts consider it highly unlikely that an actual conflict will erupt anytime soon, but it is also clear that the issues will take a while to negotiate away and execute an actual land swap.

Section 2: The new Great Game afoot on the geopolitical chessboard

On the massive chessboard that is now central, south and east Asia, China and India are engaged in a struggle for geopolitical control, cultural and economic influence. This results in a display of diplomatic strategem and soft power on several fronts.

• Energy issues: Probably the granddaddy of ‘em all! China and India are possessed, like hungry pre-teens, of an insatiable appetite for energy resources around the world. As their GDPs grow, their industries demand more energy. An increasing consumer market demands more cars, bikes, shopping malls and other conveniences. Both countries are eyeing untapped energy, mainly oil and natural gas resources around the world: be it Central Asia, Bangladesh or South America. This has resulted in diplomatic overtures by both nations to several other countries. So far China has a clear upper hand, with a recent pipeline activated from Kazakhstan, friendly overtures to Bangladesh and Venezuela. Bangladesh, with its current government being somewhat Islamic in character and stridently anti-Indian, may prove a useful ally for China. On a positive note, both countries seem to have realized the potential of alternate energy sources, and practical development of these sources on a large scale could render the energy conflict redundant.
• Geopolitical clout: China’s economic and cultural ‘soft power’ is a strong influence in South-East Asian countries. Most of these countries have a strong historical influence of Chinese culture, as well as a well-established Chinese diaspora. China is actively pursuing business, educational and cultural ties with these countries so that they warm up to the concept of a ‘benovelent dragon’. Alliances are also being forged with Central Asian countries, although that is a slower process.
• Economic competition China and India are emerging as competitors in several sectors, including IT and manufacturing. As a new generation of Chinese emerge from school with English-speaking skills, India’s ‘natural’ advantages will only erode further. China’s GDP, especially after the recent revision, is one of the biggest in the world, and growing fast. Its traditional rival, Japan, is still far ahead but has to work hard to keep that place.
• Military preparation China’s massive military expenditure is giving sleepless nights to concerned countries around the world. Both China’s neighbors, chiefly Japan, Taiwan, Russia and India, as well as the United States are concerned. The Taiwan issue is currently in a state of limbo, but with the US stretched out on the military front, Taiwan is also arming itself.
  

Section 3: China’s strategem to contain India

Several policies on part of China, both internal and foreign, have had Indian observers concerned and calling for a systematic counter-strategy. These issues are in addition to the competitive issues mentioned in the previous section.

1. Border issues
• Delays in resolution of international border: Some analysts believe that the delays in resolution of the border issues in Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim and Kashmir are part of a deliberate Chinese strategy of keeping India on tenterhooks with this issue. A delayed resolution keeps alive the possibility of future Chinese expansion, which many fear is the eventual long-term goal.
• Consolidation of Tibet: Over the past years, China has been molding Tibet into a region with overwhelmingly Chinese character. Other than persecution of anti-Chinese Tibetans and crushing rebellions, China has actively encouraged immigration of non-Tibetan Chinese, as well as construction of Chinese administrative and cultural instutions. In the next couple of years, the first phase of the Gormo-Lhasa railway is expected to be completed. This will reliably connect Tibet to the rest of China, with feeder railway lines stretching close to the Indian border. This will facilitate an enormous wave of Chinese immigration into Tibet, as well as movement of Chinese troops and heavy equipment right upto the border with India. India does not have similar mobility in that region.
  
2. Encirclement of India policy Observers believe that China is pursuing a policy of ‘encircling’ India with countries which are its own allies. As evidence, they point out China’s friendly relationship with Pakistan, and recent overtures to Nepal, Bangladesh and Myanmar. China has recently supplied arms to the Maoists in Nepal, to India’s displeasure. The friendly relations with Bangladesh, with its anti-Indian BNP government has to double benefit of accessing that country’s oil and natural resources. This and Myanmar ensure that India will have a festering concern over the North-East region on several fronts.
   
   • Presence of Indian army The Indian army and BSF is compelled to maintain a strong presence on the North-Eastern border. In the past, this has cause local resentment because of human-rights abuses by the army. However, due to uncontrolled immigration from Bangladesh, as well as the threat of insurgencies in Manipur and Nagaland, valuable resources have to be spent to maintain an increasing military presence.
   
   
   • Rise of insurgency in India It is now a well-known fact that in addition to Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal are now centres for Islamic jihadists and ISI agents who wish to target India. The India-Bangladesh border is one of the most porous land borders of the world leading to easy targets in the North-East and the rest of India. In addition, insurgents from Assam, Manipur and Nagaland use Bangladesh and Myanmar as their bases.
     Military supplies from China to Bangladesh, Nepal and Pakistan have a direct or indirect effect of encouraging Islamic insurgencies in India, the Indian Govt believes. Some analysts also think that this is a dangerous game being played by China, which has its own dissatisfied Muslim Uighur minority in the western province of XInjiang. As history has shown, Islamic insurgents have a tendency of being pet tigers, eventually coming home to haunt.
     

Section 4: The Indian strategic response

India is a fairly new independent country, which, unlike China, does not have a history of actively engaging foreign nations diplomatically. The Indian diplomatic and strategic response has been somewhat belated due to this inexperience, and only recently do the foreign policy mavens seem to have awakened to the need for aggressive and proactive diplomatic engagement and strategy. But so far, the response has been largely defensive and reactionist. India has allowed a far more mature China, so far, to dictate the course of action. There are definitely some recent steps being taken by India, which hopefully indicate a new maturity.

• Energy deals with Iran: India has been aggressively pursuing petroleum deals with Iran, leveraging its past friendly relationships with Iran. In the absence of Iraq, which, during Saddam, was friendly to India, Iran is speculated to be the largest supplier of petroleum to India, subject to the fruition of the Indo-Iran gas pipeline and the resolution of logistical problems with Pakistan (which, regrettably, is an obstacle in more ways than one).
• Shifts in alliance with USA: The US attitude towards India has softened in recent years, and with George W Bush’s projected visit, seems poised to reach some real conclusions, especially with regard to nuclear power. Belatedly enough, the US govt may have realized that it needs India to balance China in this region. However, there is a lurking danger of India being used as a manipulated pawn in this chess match. India is already having a balancing act to maintain on the matter of Iran, which is anathema to the US.
• Alliance with Russia: India continues to maintain its military relationship with Russia, regularly acquiring arms to modernize its army and air force. In December 2005, the IAF opened its first base on foreign territory, in Tajikistan, with Russian co-operation.
• Encircle Pakistan: By developing friendly and deep relationships with Russia, Afghanistan, Iran and the Central Asian ‘stans’, India seems to aim to encircle Pakistan with its allies. The Tajikistan military base is about a 10-minute flight from the Pakistan border, which makes it more difficult for Pakistan to launch another Kargil-like attack.
• Participation in ASEAN: India has been more prominent in engaging the SE Asian countries, leveraging its ancient cultural links. Education, development and trade seem to be the current buzzwords. The Indian govt mentions co-operation in IT, and drug development. Those countries welcome the presence of India as a counterbalance to potential Chinese hegemony.
• Attention to the NE: A little-known plan that is under execution is the building of a 2500-mile long fence around Bangladesh as a means of controlling illegal immigration, along with insurgent entry. India is also increasing troop presence along the border. In relatively quiet regions of the north-east, the potentially abusive powers given to the army are slowly being revoked while increasing troops in the violent areas.
  

Regardless of how this game plays out, this is indeed an exciting time to be in history, when we are witnessing some major and long-term changes in the geopolitical power equations of the world.

Section 5: Effects of the China Syndrome
The China syndrome has had several effects on India’s perception of itself and the world today, many of them positive.

• China as a role model: Many Indian economists and politicians view China as a economic role model to emulate, watching its implementation of a successful reform process and efficient use of human resources. There is a persistent sense of ‘If they can do it, so can we’.
• Influence on the reform process: The apparent success of China’s reforms have emboldened reformist Indian politicians as well as intelligentsia, who now are unabashed supporters of liberalization and globalization. This is making it easier for politicians to implement disinvestment strategies for inefficient public sector firms over the traditional objections of leftist parties in India. The reform process in India is still a whole lot slower, owing to the requirements of a democratic process. The pros and cons of this are continuously debated in the media, with some people lamenting that India can never catch up with China, and others arguing that a democracy leads to a long-term stability and social equity.
• Increased efficiency: Manufacturing, which suffered dramatically in India due to the rise of China, is on the ascent again. In my own area, several industrial complexes have emerged, mostly manufacturing small plastic products, which for a while exclusively came from China. Recently, a collective public soul-searching was sparked off over the realization that most plastic images of Indian deities were being made in China. But it remains to be seen how this trend progresses. The increased efficiency is palpable on part of the IT and BPO companies which are aware of how precarious their lead is and that complacency would be fatal.
• India’s awareness of its role on the global arena: India seems to be growing out of its Nehruvian idealism on the world stage and assuming a more pragmatic role, as well as one that is more far-sighted and assertive of its own long-term interests.
• Search for alternate energy sources: A lot of the right noises are being made about alternative energy: biofuels, wind power, solar power and so on. In my housing area, rainwater harvesting seems to be an inevitable reality.
  

In conclusion, I must say that the China Syndrome is a real phenomenon in India which has resulted in a much-desired ‘kick-in-the-pants’ for Indian society as a whole. It is quite clear that China definitely has the upper-hand in Asia right now and will do so for a while, especially due to its early start, authorative government and focused mature diplomatic priorities. However, the internal situation of China is an enigma, and concerns exist about the effects of the reforms on the rural and under-privileged populations. India is slowly but surely moving in the right direction, though plagued with infrastructure issues, corruption, lack of political will in some quarters, and a belated awareness of international diplomacy. However, these issues are being remedied, and the century ahead promises to be an exciting one for anyone associated with the development of these two vast nations. History promises to be made, and it feels great to be part of it.

Iran and nuclear needs

I could not have put my feelings more aptly than
this report of statements by Ahmadinejad. Iran does not violate the NPT (even though NPT has no sembelance of fairness), USA does violate it. Every country has the right to go for alternate energy sources with rapidly depleting fuel supplies. The nuclear club just wants to keep it to themselves for financial benefits, so that they can sell the technology under licence to all other countries whom they force not to develop it themselves.

Some excerpts:

- "Disarmament and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons were the most important contents of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). A country, which possesses the biggest nuclear arsenal, embarks on proliferation of nuclear weapons in defiance of the safeguards (of NPT) and threatens to use them against others, is not competent to comment on peaceful use of nuclear know-how by other states,"

- "As a developing state, Iran should speedily increase its investment in different energy-related sectors. The United States, despite having giant fossil fuel reserves, has made considerable amount of investment in the nuclear energy field,"

What makes an extremist?

What turns a seemingly normal, well-educated young man into someone who believes so strongly in a religion or philosophy that he is willing and eager to take up arms for it? Going one step further, he's even willing to die for it?

This article in The New Yorker is a short but deep sojourn into the vicious cocktail of seemingly innocuous circumstances that may direct a young man or woman down the deadly path to becoming a suicide bomber.

Read Article

The author delves into various experiences, including his own, and outlines how a combination of youthful rebellion, spiritual yearning, immigrant isolation, racial discrimination and existentialist crises could work havoc on the psyche of a susceptible youth.

(Ed note -- Raj)
I originally thought of posting this as a comment to the previous Nathuram Godse post, because I think the same factors explain his large part, his actions too, but decided this article merited a post (and subsequent discussion) of its own.

Nathuram's Court Deposition

Self Defense text
A very interesting read! Many might not agree, but definitely worthwhile to read.
I surely need to get my hand on Mi Nathuram Godse Boltoy.

NYT article on outsourcing by Suketu Mehta

Here's an NYT article by Suketu Mehta, author of 'Maximum city: Bombay lost and found' on outsourcing in today's issue. He brings a perspective to the American reader which is often lost in the politicized nature of the debate.

Here's the article

I will add my comment later, but I also recommend reading Discussion on Sepia Mutiny on the same article.

Raj

'The Namesake' rocks

My opinions on Jhumpa Lahiri's 'The Namesake', crossposted from my personal blog at Anshu's request. Click below for the original post:

'The Namesake' rocks!

NYT: The Heterosexual Revolution

Let me initiate the first serious topic here right away. Here's a link to an article in the NY Times:
The Heterosexual Revolution.

Just in case the link dies, I shall provide a gist of the author's argument in this posting. I shall then place my own opinions as a comment.

Summary of author's argument:

The idea of marriage is not the monolithic concept many imagine it to be, but it has undergone drastic changes through time. Traditional marriage, in all societies including the west, was primarily decided on political and economic considerations, regardless of social class. The concept of marriage for love and happiness did not arise until post-renaissance thinkers until about 200 years ago, even then it was labeled too radical.

The idea of marriage for love took serious root in the 20th century, with women's liberation. As women started becoming more and more equal and independent, some of the traditional considerations of marriage were rendered redundant, and marriage for love became the predominant philosophy behind Western marriages.

This changing nature of marriage so far has been wrought not by the relatively nascent Gay-rights movement, but by heterosexuals themselves. It seems logical the right of two consenting adults in love to be married, regardless of gender, is the next inevitable change to the institution. That path was chosen not 20, but 200 years ago by heterosexuals, when they decided on love as the primary consideration.

Let the adda begin!

Hello world!

We are an eccentric and sanguine group of Bongs at the Dept of Computer Science at Rice.

I say eccentric, for lack of a better term. In a more innocent place and time, we would have preferred the term queer (at least one of us would :) and possibly, gay. Unfortunately, like so many other components of our vocabulary, our favourite words have ascended to rainbow heights, rendering them somewhat unreachable to us mere straight-forward mortals.

We, as our mutated Bong DNA compels us, have three fundamental needs: food, drink, and procrastination. And what better way to fulfill those needs than the Adda, the most important contribution of Bong culture to the world of philosophy?

So let the discussions flow!

Raj, Santa, Amit, Anirban, Apan