India’s China agenda

My article India’s China Agenda appeared in the Edit Page of The Pioneer

Here is the link...

Compared to China, which is assertive and has undertaken innovative developments, India is definitively trailing. Preparation for any eventuality is the way forward to counter its rise

There is no doubt that 2019 has been a special year for China: Lavish events were organised to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). In 1949, from the rostrum of the Tiananmen Square, Chairman Mao had announced, “China has arisen.” On October 1, 2019, Chinese President Xi Jinping was on the same wavelength as his predecessor when he said, “No force can ever shake the status of China or stop the Chinese people and the nation from marching forward.” On that day, Beijing displayed several futuristic military gadgets.
On December 29, the Global Times listed China’s advanced weaponry. It said, “the year 2019” has been a “year of harvest” for China’s military equipment as the country showcased a “massive selection” of the latest, advanced and powerful weapons that operate on land, sea and air. It is not only in the field of advanced armaments that Beijing has been “doing well” but in this domain, the progress is indicative of an assertive China and of the innovative developments undertaken by Beijing. Comparatively, India is definitively trailing. Even though the communist party’s newspaper observed, “These displays of China’s new weapons showed transparency in the country’s military development” and sent a message to the world that China was determined to “safeguard sovereignty and peace,” the fact remains that China is still preparing itself.
Last week, in the Port of Dalian in Liaoning Province, China launched the country’s 23rd Type 052D and the sixth Type 055 destroyer. Experts said “the ship was one of the world’s largest and most powerful destroyers” and was capable of leading a high sea fleet or becoming the “pillar in an aircraft carrier battle group”, said the Global Times.
A few days earlier, China had officially commissioned its first domestically-built aircraft carrier, the Shandong. The CNN reported, “China has officially commissioned its first domestically-built aircraft carrier, the Shandong, a significant step forward in Chinese President Xi Jinping’s ambitions for the country to field a world-class Navy.” Xi attended the commissioning ceremony in the southern province of Hainan where the carrier joined the Chinese Navy. In 2019, China launched the highest number of warships in the world: Nine destroyers, one comprehensive supply ship, one comprehensive landing ship, one amphibious assault ship, 12 light frigates with a total displacement of 200,000 tonnes, surpassing the US by far.
The Global Times quoted military experts as saying, “2019 will not be the end of China’s military equipment development. More weapons are expected in 2020 and beyond.” But there is another side to the coin. President Xi has been facing a rough sea at home. The fourth plenary session of the 19th Chinese Communist Party’s Central Committee was held in Beijing from October 28 to 31. The members discussed the work report presented by Xi and adopted it “to uphold and improve the system of socialist rule of law with Chinese characteristics and improve the party’s capacity for law-based governance and law-based exercising of state power.”
The communiqué mentions, the nation is facing “increasing challenges at home and abroad.” The gathering upheld the principle of “one country, two systems,” maintaining lasting prosperity and stability in Hong Kong and Macao, and “promoting the peaceful reunification of China.”
Despite the serious difficulties faced by China, India needs to be prepared to respond to its rise. But first, let’s talk about what India should not do. The two-day meeting between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping at a resort in October in Mamallapuram was an occasion to talk about “civilisation.” But was it of any help?
As it is, during Nehruvian days, India was fond of this hazy concept. The dictionary thus defines the term as “an act or a process of civilising, as by bringing out of a savage, uneducated, or unrefined state, or of being civilised.” Already, in the 1950s, this great “idea” allowed the Indian leadership to “dream” of lofty principles such as peaceful co-existence, while China was quietly consolidating its presence on the Tibetan plateau and preparing for a war with India.
Today, India should look after its own interests and forget about vague idealistic concepts. It should learn from the Chinese leadership, which has always remained pragmatic and down-to-earth. Unfortunately, when India speaks about its past, it does so to avoid talking about the present. This is what may have happened between India and China during the two-day encounter at Mamallapuram. Though it is not known what went on for two-and-a-half hours during the one-to-one dinner composed of exotic Tamil dishes, very few concrete decisions seem to have been taken. The Indian foreign secretary affirmed that the “K” word was not pronounced. This is regrettable for the occasion was opportune to clarify the Indian position.
One positive outcome from the meeting was the decision to establish a high-level economic and trade dialogue mechanism “with the objective of achieving enhanced trade and commercial relations, as well as to better balance the trade between the two countries.” This can, hopefully, help rebalance the trade deficit — today in India’s disfavour.
An example of a positive pragmatic policy for India has been the creation of the post of Chief of Defence Staff (CDS). A day before the end of the year, the Government finally nominated Gen Bipin Rawat, outgoing Chief of Army Staff, as the first CDS “to drive the desperately-needed integration among the three services.”
But why did we have to wait for one day before the end of Gen Rawat’s tenure to see his name released? There was probably an intense lobbying from the babus to preserve their turf.  The history of modern India is a Mahabharata between the progressive forces, which want to change “eternal Bharat”, and the entrenched administration sticking to their privileges.
To win this battle would be the best way to counter China. As Rawat was handing over the baton to Gen MM Naravane, his successor, he was asked a question: Is the Army better prepared today to face the security challenges than when he took over? Gen Rawat replied, “Yes, we are better prepared.”
Preparation for any eventuality is the way forward to counter the rise of China. At the same time, India needs to continue investing in infrastructure, telecommunication systems, roads, airports and border areas while also providing a decent living and empowering frontier populations. In the future, Artificial Intelligence (AI), latest telecommunication means and new technologies should be indigenously developed if India does not want to be left behind. Only then will China respect India and will not be tempted to engage in an adventure like it did in 1962.
This is a tough agenda for 2020.

So, who has a Cold War mindset?

Chinese map of Sikkim showing the trijunction at Batang La
It is what the joint Survey of 1956 had confirmed

My article So, who has a Cold War mindset? appeared on Thursday in the Edit Page of The Pioneer

Here is the link...

It is ironical that while it is the Middle Kingdom which is getting ready for another stand-off, it loudly objects to New Delhi protecting its side of the border

China has difficulties to digest the Doklam episode for which Beijing (or at least the People's Liberation Army) was fully responsible. Senior Colonel Wu Qian, spokesperson of the Ministry of Nation Defense (MND), in his regular monthly Press conference spoke in a derogatory manner: “I have noticed many China-related remarks made by this Indian general lately.” ‘This general’ is the Chief of Army Staff, General Bipin Rawat, who had just said India needed to shift its focus to the northern border. A logical and normal statement after last year’s confrontation at the tri-junction between Sikkim, Tibet and Bhutan?
Col Wu continued: “I would like to stress that Donglang [Doklam] is China’s territory and the remarks from the Indian side also shows that illegal border crossing of the Indian troops is a clear fact. We hope that the Indian side will draw lessons from the incident.”He also spoke of India’s ‘Cold War mentality’.
A look at the facts: In 2012, the Governments of India and China had reached an agreement that the location of the tri-junction would be finalised in consultation with the concerned countries. On June 30, 2017, the Ministry of External Affairs issued a statement: “Any attempt, therefore, to unilaterally determine tri-junction points is in violation of this understanding.” The finalisation of the boundary was to take place during the Special Representatives’ talks.
In June-July 1956, a tour of the Sikkim-Bhutan-Tibet frontier from the tri-junction area was conducted by the Ministry of External Affairs, the Survey of India, along with Bhutanese officials. The location of the boundary was reconfirmed on the watershed principle, but also on the basis of the reports of the local inhabitants: “The Bhutan-Tibet frontier starts in the vicinity of Batang La and runs along the La Hen Chum ridge via Sinchu La and then along the Amo Chu upto Chilim Chon.” The description continues till the Chomo Lhari, in North-West Bhutan.
Interestingly, the factors which weighed in favour of the confirmation of this boundary were, firstly, “[in] the west of Amo Chu, the published Chinese maps themselves appeared to include the Doklam pastures (south of Batang La and Sinchu La line) in Bhutan; and secondly, the east of Amo Chu, the Bhutanese had strong claims over the pastures of the Langmarpo valley (south of Tendji ridge).”
Why did China need to suddenly change the status quo and start building a road on the Bhutanese territory?
It was apparently the initiative of a Chinese General, with the knowledge of President Xi Jinping (who was probably not briefed on the details of the operation and its implications).
In an informed piece, The Indian Express recently questioned: “Who in the Chinese hierarchy ordered the extension of the track in Dolam from the point it had been constructed up to in 2003, to the Jampheri ridge?”
According to the newspaper, the road construction was ordered by General Zhao Zongqi, commander of the Western Theatre Command facing India; Zhao had, for two decades, served in Tibet.
The Indian Express said: “Even before the face-off in Doklam, Chinese border troops had been telling Indian soldiers in daily interactions at multiple points on the Line of Actual Control (LAC) that General Zhao had walked each of these tracks with military patrols over 20 years, and had been rarely confronted by the Indians. As the Indian deployment has increased over the past decade, General Zhao is unwilling to accept the challenge to Chinese claims. Not only in Doklam, but also at other places on the LAC.”
It might partly be speculation, but there is no doubt today about the involvement of General Zhao, who probably had forgotten to read the agreement arrived at by the Indian and Chinese diplomats in 2012 about the status quo at the tri-junction. Amongst other things, it shows that China does not always speak with one voice.
While the PLA talks of a Cold War mindset, pointing a finger at India, China is not ready to restart the usual Border Personnel Meetings (BPM) along the Line of Actual Control (LAC). Only two BPMs took place on the occasion of the Republic Day, both in Ladakh region (in DBO and Chushul area). Why was no BPM held in Bumla, Kibithu in Arunachal and Nathu-la in Sikkim?
Why has the Indian drone, which accidentally fell in the Chumbi Valley, not yet been returned? Why has information on the flow of the Sutlej and Pareechu rivers in Himachal and the Yarlung Tsangpo/Brahmaputra still not been shared with India?
The Central Water Commission recently raised serious concerns over the Pareechu and even sought the Ministry of External Affair’s help: “We wrote to the Ministry. China stopped sharing information about the tributary’s flow last year. They said that the water monitoring site across the border is damaged,” AK Gupta, the Commission’s regional director told The Hindustan Times.
On New Year’s Eve, President Xi Jinping delivered an 11-minute televised speech to extend his greetings to all Chinese and… friends all over the world. Xi said that Beijing is dedicated to safeguarding peace. “China will act as a builder of world peace, a contributor to global development and an upholder of the international order.”
Will this translate in peace on the border in 2018? Probably not! Soon after, the PLA intruded in Tuting sector of the Siang Valley of Arunachal Pradesh. The irony is that while China itself is getting ready for another standoff, Beijing loudly objects to Delhi protecting its side of the border.
The China Daily recently reported: “Investment in infrastructure in the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) is helping to lift 628 villages along the border out of poverty.” The Chinese newspaper further asserted: “After getting access to electricity and the construction of new roads, tea farmers and herdsmen in a village some 200 kilometres southwest of Lhasa in Tsona county founded a cooperative that provides skill training and job opportunities for villagers.”
Lepo, the first Tibetan village north on the McMahon Line in the Tawang sector, is said to have received several thousands of visitors last year and to have adequate lodging facilities.
China also admitted: “Starting last year, more than 100 million yuan (Rs 99.4 crore) has been invested in infrastructure in villages of less than 100 families as a part of a broader construction project to build model villages in the border area.”
There are many such examples on the Tibetan side of the McMahon Line.
In the meantime, it is refreshing that the new Indian Ambassador in China, Gautam Bambawale told The Global Times: Our interaction must be based on equality and mutual benefit. Also, in the India-China border areas, especially at some sensitive points, it is important not to change the status quo. We need to be clear about this.”
It is indeed China which did not respect its engagements. Year 2018 may not be serene despite the peaceful vows of President Xi.

Post-Doklam, Chinese aggression not yet over

My article Post-Doklam, Chinese aggression not yet over appeared in the Edit Page of The Pioneer.

Here is the link...

The renewed Chinese aggressiveness, including against India's Army Chief, is probably triggered by a great sense of insecurity, not to say instability. The battle for Chairman Xi is far from over
The Doklam incident is over and one could say, ‘All’s well that ends well’, to paraphrase the title of Shakespeare’s play. Lessons should, however, be drawn from the nearly three-month long confrontation near the tri-junction Tibet-Sikkim-Bhutan. Even once a bilateral agreement has been found, China has remained belligerent. Aggressiveness is still over-present in the Chinese official media.  Can it be due to the fact that China lost face and had to withdraw from the disputed area without building a road?
Chief of Army Staff General Bipin Rawat had just to say that India needed to be prepared for a two-front war and The Global Times went ballistic. The communist party’s tabloid asserted, “While many people believe it is time to leave the episode of the border stand-off behind, Rawat has sent the completely opposite message.”
Verging on vulgarity, The Global Times wrote, “Rawat has such a big mouth that he could ignite the hostile atmosphere between Beijing and New Delhi. He not only turns a blind eye to international rules, but also made us see the arrogance probably prevailing in the Indian Army.”
Incidentally, who broke ‘international rules’ in the first place? There was nothing wrong in the Army Chief’s remarks, but the tabloid added: “Generals in India need to form some basic knowledge about the current situation. …It seems that there are two India(s), one that is thriving and …the other that keeps provoking and tangling with China. Should we embrace the first India or teach the second India a lesson? Let the first India discipline the second one and the Indians with dignity should take care of the mouths of senior officials like Rawat.”
The party mouthpiece then invites India to reflect.

Why such aggressiveness?
One answer is that all is not well for Chinese President Xi Jinping, especially within the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). His in-depth reforms are not appreciated by all. Just a few weeks before the party’s 19th Congress (scheduled to start on October 18), an important reshuffle of the PLA’s generals has taken place, not only at the Group Army (Corps) level, but at the top of the hierarchy too.
US-based publication, Quartz, wrote: “As the big day nears, lots of the behind-the-scene political struggles are gearing up,” adding that Xi has promoted favorites to top posts in the PLA. In the process, two top generals got the sack hardly a month before retiring.
Bloomberg explained the move: “Two generals who sit on China’s top military body have been excluded from a twice-a-decade leadership reshuffle next month, setting the stage for President Xi Jinping to carry out a further shake-up of the world’s largest Army.”
General Fang Fenghui, the equivalent of the US Chief of Defence Staff, was one of China’s most visible officers — he accompanied Xi to Florida to meet US President Donald Trump in April and received his US counterpart last month. Soon after, he was replaced as Chief of the PLA’s Joint Staff Department by General Li Zuocheng, a Xi favorite. His name and General Zhang Yang’s, another member of the all-powerful Central Military Commission (CMC), were not on the list of the delegates to the Congress.
The rumour mill said that they were being ‘investigated’, a term not usually auguring well for the targeted person. This may indicate disciplinary probes and bad days ahead for the generals.
Bloomberg asserted: “As many as five members of the top military body were already expected to step down under an unwritten rule marking senior officials for retirement after 68. Fang and Zhang are [were] among five members below the threshold, which would put them in contention for a powerful vice chairman post.”
Hong Kong’s publication, Sing Tao Daily, usually well informed, quoted sources in Beijing, to say both were investigated for suspected breaches of party discipline.
Indian analyst, Brahma Chellaney suggested that the reshuffle was linked to the Doklam issue: “pullbacks suggest that the removed chief, General Fang Fenghui, was an obstacle to clinching a deal with India and probably was responsible for precipitating the stand-off in the first place.”
To support his argument, he quoted the Chumar incident in Ladakh which happened as President Xi landed in India on a state visit in September 2014; a theory difficult to confirm. It is, however, clear that a younger generation is taking over. This reflects the deep changes in the PLA…and this may have triggered resentment amongst the ‘retiring’ officers.
On September 1, General Han Weiguo, only 61, was appointed commander of the PLA Army and 60-year old General Ding Laihang, commander of the PLA Air Force (PLAAF). General Han served in Fujian in the 1980s at the time Xi was Deputy Mayor of Xiamen, while Gen Ding’s career also overlapped with Xi’s term in Fujian. He was Chief of Staff of the eighth corps based in Fuzhou in 2001 and later head of the PLAAF in Fuzhou; Xi was then Governor of Fujian Province.
The list of PLA’s delegates to the 19th Congress has some surprises. The 303 ‘elected’ members belong to 31 different units, compared with 19 in 2012; one example, the new PLA rocket force is now represented. While the PLA itself has 253 delegates, the People’s Armed Police has 50.
According to The Global Times: “The number of units increased due to the ongoing military overhaul launched in 2015, which split the former four military headquarters — staff, politics, logistics and armaments — into 15 new agencies.”
Interesting are the general statistics. More than 90 per cent of those ‘elected’ will be first time attendees, representing a new generation of officers who will owe their rise to Chairman Xi, who heads the CMC.
According to The Asia Times, the ethnicity factor plays an important role in promotions: “while sweeping military change is on the cards at China’s upcoming communist party Congress, few expect ethnic minority officers from unstable regions to make top brass.”
Though there is a slight rise in the number of ‘ethnic’ delegates (six per cent of PLA delegates are ethnic minority officers, from 4.6 per cent at the 18th Congress), their number is relatively small and they don’t occupy important post.
Asia Times noted: “The Manchus and Tibetans will each send three delegates, while the Uyghur, Hui and Tujia will each put forward two. The Zhuang, Xibe, Korean, Qiang, Bai and Naxi ethnicities will each send one delegate to the Congress.” Incidentally, two of the three Tibetan delegates are lady officers.
‘Ethnic representation’ has always been limited to junior ranks “but thins out considerably at higher levels. There are comparatively few generals of ethnic minority backgrounds,” writes The Asia Times. It is telling that the PLA has never seen Uyghur or Tibetan commanders posted in their own military districts.
The renewed Chinese aggressiveness, including against India’s Army Chief, is probably triggered by a great sense of insecurity, not to say instability. The battle of Chairman Xi is far from over.

Will the 'paharis' look after the Himalayan borders?

My article entitled (sic) Smell the coffee along the China border appeared in the Edit Page of The Pioneer.
 
Here is the Link...

While Beijing has been pressing with remarkable speed in developing infrastructure along its borders with India, the latter has shown equally remarkable laxity over the same. Hopefully, things will now change

The Army Commanders’ Conference was recently held at the Indian Military Academy at Dehradun. Led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, National Security Advisor Ajit Doval and Minister for Defence Manohar Parrikar, dignitaries were given an extensive briefing by the three Services chiefs, particularly on  infrastructure development along the China and Pakistan borders.
At a time when China is investing billions of yuans to develop its ‘Indian’ frontiers, it was a timely review. On January 23, the website, China Tibet Online, announced that a road leading to the last two townships without road access in Tibet, would soon be completed. Both roads in Metok County of Nyingchi town, started in 2015, are expected to be soon operational. The Metok County is situated north of the Tuting Circle of Upper Siang of Arunachal Pradesh, where the Yarlung Tsangpo enters India to become the Siang (and later the Brahmaputra).
The Chinese article says: “The geological conditions are complex with high mountains and deep valleys, leading to high road construction costs and long construction periods.” In 2017 alone, a total of 52 billion yuan (nearly six billion dollars) will be invested in infrastructure assets on the plateau, and “355km of high-grade highway [will be added], leading to a total highway mileage of more
than 90,000 km.”
The Chinese website adds that these roads could not be built earlier “due to the high mountains and deep valleys”. It was only in October 2013 that Metok Highway was officially opened to the public: “Metok waved goodbye to China’s last County without road access”, said China Tibet Online.
On the other side of the range, the situation is different. A recent article in The Arunachal Times describes the sad state of affairs. Journalist Tongam Rina recounts her ‘memorable trip’ to Tuting; she had joined an all-women team from the Arunachal Institute of Tribal Studies of Rajiv Gandhi University in Itanagar. Rina writes: “After a few kilometres of good roads, we hit the typical Arunachal road; forever under-construction, chopping off hills that inevitably result in landslides during the monsoon, at the same time destroying whatever is left of an existing road.”
She continues her narration after a first night on the way: “…The next morning, the caretaker of the guesthouse prompted us to eat, “Tuting ka rasta bahut dur hai, khana jaldi nehi milega… After a few kilometres out of town, we were on bumpy, narrow road again. The only saving grace was the mighty beautiful Siang, flowing majestically below.”
The description is vivid: “And a bad jerk forced me to look at the road again. The road is so bad that one can’t drive more than 15 kilometres per hour. One bad move from the driver because of the bad road could literally end the journey.”
On the other side, China is planning to build a Gangdise International Tourism Cooperation Zone in Ngari Prefecture, adjoining Himachal Pradesh and Ladakh, ‘to serve as an opening window to South Asia’(sic). Gangdise or Trans-Himalaya is a term coined by Swedish explorer Sven Hedin in the 19th century. It is the space on both sides of the main Himalayan range, following the Indian border.
KangbaTV, a Chinese site about Tibet, explains that the zone will cover areas around the Himalaya, mainly in Ngari area, but it will also include Shigatse, Lhoka (southeast of Lhasa), Purang (near Mt Kailash), Zham (landport with Nepal), Yatung (in Chumbi Valley), Kyirong (border between Nepal and Tibet) and Tsona (north of Tawang). But the main development will focus on western Tibet. The website adds: “Scenic spots in Ngari area are all featured. With the drive of the main scenic spots, travelling routes of other tourist spots have been gradually developed, which will make Ngari tourism a growth-pole of Tibet’s tourism.”
China is planning to transform the Trans-Himalayan region into a mega tourist spot. For the purpose, Beijing announced that two new highways will soon be constructed leading to the Indian border and that Highway G219, the main artery connecting Tibet to Xinjiang (also known as the Aksai Chin road) will be upgraded. All this will be done during China’s 13th Five-Year Plan (2016-2020).
The first new highway, known as G564, will branch off from the G219, near Mount Kailash (Tharchen) and head south, passing between Mansarovar and Rakshas lakes before reaching Purang, near the tri-junction Nepal-India-Tibet. The length of the road will be 107 km; it is designed for a speed of 80 km/h. The construction should be completed by August 2019. The second highway, the G365, will connect the G219 to Tholing and Tsaparang. The ancient monastic complexes are presently being restored to bring a large number of Chinese tourists to the famous ruins of the Guge Kingdom.
Another important development is the construction a second highway between Tibet and Xinjiang, via Minfeng. The road will be 558 km long. The deeply-worrying aspect of the project is that it crosses the highly eco-sensitive Changthang National Nature Reserve. It will run for 110 km in the main reserve, about 270 km in the buffer zone and some 100 km in the ‘experimental area’. More than one billion American dollars is invested in the project. The road should be put into operation by early 2021.
All this comes at a time when Beijing has announced the creation of a new Central Commission for Integrated Military and Civilian Development. It was launched on January 22, and according to The People’s Daily, experts have declared it vital for China’s national defence “The commission will decide and coordinate affairs on civil-military integration”. It will function directly under the Politburo’s Standing Committee with President Xi Jinping as the Chairman.
In the meantime, Delhi still lives in the Middle Ages, with an antediluvian Inner Line Permit and hardly any cooperation between the Armed Forces and the civil administration (at least in Ladakh).
But India has perhaps a chance. For the first time, the National Security Advisor, the Army chief and the Director of the Research & Analysis Wing are all natives of Pauri Garwhal in Uttarakhand. One can hope that the paharis will understand better the issue of mountain development.
The Indian Expressrecently noted: “Pauri Garhwal district has the distinction of sending three men to topmost positions in the current security establishment. At the same time, it suffers high migration out of the hills, thanks to near-zero irrigation, declining farming, zero employment, poor education and health facilities.”
And no highways of course! Let us hope that this will be remedied soon. It’s of vital interest to the country’s security and stability.