|
|
A new word for Chinese diplomacy -- 'duplimacy'?
|
|
|
|
Top Stories |
|
|
|
|
Ravi M. Khanna | 24 Jan, 2012
"China wants to develop long-term friendship and cooperation with
India." So said the Chinese official who held border talks with Indian
officials this week. He also predicted a "golden period for India-China
relations" in the near future. What he did not say, but sceptics like me
heard him say between the lines, is that all this is possible only if
it is done on China's terms.
What we heard between the lines is
never uttered by China, but only demonstrated by its actions. So the
real dichotomy lies between what China "says" and what China "does".
Just
days before Chinese State Councillor Dai Bingguo's statement, the
Chinese government had already shown that China will never budge from
its policy towards the border issue. The Chinese government denied visa
to an Indian Air Force officer who was to go as a member of the Indian
military delegation to China on the ground that he was from Arunachal
Pradesh, the Indian state claimed by China. This led to India scaling
down its delegation from the original 30 members to 15.
At one
point China even took a subtle step to show that it can, if it wants,
consider Kashmiris, not as Indian citizens, but citizens of "Kashmir" by
not stamping the visa on their Indian passports but issuing it on a
separate paper.
These kind of moves by China are not limited only
towards India. This is the underlying character of their dubious
diplomacy, or shall we call it Chinese "duplimacy".
Last year,
even Washington had to face Chinese "duplimacy". Just hours before then
US Defence Secretary Robert Gates arrived in Beijing to improve military
ties between the two powers, the Chinese military engaged in an unusual
show of force by staging the test flight of their top secret new
stealth fighter jet J-20. That was China's action. The words from China
came later when President Hu Jintao and other civilian leaders gave
Gates the impression that they were unaware of the test.
Some
China experts feel that China shows this kind of arrogance because its
adventures in the past against other nations were not nipped in the bud
but were rather tolerated. Since there were no consequences, China keeps
on flaunting its power in Asia.
In fact, ever since 1949 when China came under Communist rule, its history has been replete with aggressions.
In
the Korean war, China sent in one million troops to defend North Korea
against UN coalition forces. Then it attacked and took over an
independent Tibetan kingdom. In 1962, China invaded and tried to get
control of Indian territory. Seven years later it tried to invade across
the Soviet border in the Damanskiy Island area. Then came the war of
aggression against Vietnam in 1979.
But if you go by what China
says, they are a peaceful nation that has no history of aggression. The
fact is that by action they have always been the bully in the area, and
their statements have always tried to portray them as a victim.
Anyway,
history tells us that Beijing would not hesitate in using military
force to secure its territory if the Chinese leaders believed such
action is necessary. Most countries have wondered why China was rapidly
building up its armed forces without acknowledging it.
The
Chinese official who held border talks this week with India also
rejected the notion of any rivalry between China and India. Now this is
another statement that fits into the mould of China's "duplimacy". What
he said can also mean that China considers it so far ahead of India that
there isn't any rivalry to speak of. Does China think that India is
naïve enough to be lulled into a slumber of complacency and really
believe that there is no rivalry?
So may be what the Chinese
official really meant was that it can be a "golden period for
India-China relations", provided India shuns the rivalry and accepts
China as the "daddy" in Asia.
But, apparently, India can never
forget how it was bitten by the "Hindi Cheeni bhai bhai" bug in the
Nehru era. So it should be twice shy and doubly prepared.
* Ravi M. Khanna is a longtime South Asia observer. He has also headed
the South Asia Desk in the Voice of America Newsroom in Washington and
published a book called "TV News Writing Made Easy for Newcomers". He
can be reached at ravitheactor@yahoo.com) * The views expressed by the author in this feature are entirely his own and do not necessarily reflect the views of SME Times.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
history is not what you read in books
kumar | Wed Jan 25 15:07:29 2012
i seems you are a bad historian, if you read properly will clarify a lot Kashmir (please read again the last agreement signed by Indian government in 1948 and ratified in 1972 and identity for the territory in undrafted agreement. Arunachal Pradesh : since China doesn't recognise the state as part of India, it will be unappropriate for a resident of that state to represent India at any representation to China, as accepting that representation can be read as accepting residents of Arunachal Pradesh as citizen of India which is not in accordance with the state external affair policy.
Fact vs. Words
RedWhiteBlue | Tue Jan 24 06:03:13 2012
IF China were aggressive, there would not be an India today. Keep that firmly in your mind. Back in the last conflict, there was NOTHING between the PLA and New Delhi.
Instead of wet dreaming about revenge, if our Indian friends would spend more time solving the many problems of society, may hap India's GDP would not only be 1/4 that of China's.
Have you noticed that despite all the talk about India being an "ally", the Yanks are investing in China?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customs Exchange Rates |
Currency |
Import |
Export |
US Dollar
|
84.35
|
82.60 |
UK Pound
|
106.35
|
102.90 |
Euro
|
92.50
|
89.35 |
Japanese
Yen |
55.05 |
53.40 |
As on 12 Oct, 2024 |
|
|
Daily Poll |
|
|
Will the new MSME credit assessment model simplify financing? |
|
|
|
|
|
Commented Stories |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|