Background:- You might have heard it before, how do you tackle a bully… STAND UP to it !!! Unfortunately, “bullying” has been China’s geopolitical policy. The bully is backed by a trillion dollar economic muscle which it got by being the “Sweat Shop” of the world and of course no country wants prosperity at that cost of human rights violation and what not. Now, it just can not keep its hands in its pocket, because it is not in the very nature of bullies.

In diplomacy there is a saying that “Speak softly and Carry a big stick, you will go far” and that is what India needs to do now. To stand up to a bully you don’t need bravado, a “slap in the face” will do just fine.

Many though that when India could not get NSG, it was India’s loss, WRONG, China had to fire its bureaucrats because it faced the diplomatic isolation, almost all supported India, even Mexico and Italy after the PM’s visit. So China’s isolation is apparent. 

It also knows that its sweat shops are going to be closed sooner than later, and you no need humans to assemble what can be done by machine now with a bit of Artificial Intelligence. Hence the OBOR initiative, to sell its products and dominate the region geopolitically.

Nevertheless, the bullying is back and lets get into the matter at hand.

Details :-

Nothing illustrates this better than China’s recent efforts to test India’s responses in the tri-junction of Sikkim, Bhutan and southern Tibet, where it is building a road from where it can threaten the Chicken’s Neck region of India, which connects India to the rest of the North-East. It destroyed some bunkers on the Indian side, and has trespassed into areas claimed by Bhutan. In the resultant standoff, it arrogantly reminded us of our 1962 defeat.

To which, Defence Minister Arun Jaitley mildly retorted that the India of 2017 is not the India of 1962. China has – not unexpectedly – responded that even China is not what it was in 1962, and will take “all necessary measures” to safeguard its territory.

The China of 2017 is acting like that T-Rex in Jurassic Park, which tests a different part of the electrified fence each time to check for weaknesses. It tests India repeatedly in areas of weakness, whether it is in Ladakh, or the North-East. In 2013, a platoon-sized Chinese army contingent pitched tents 30 km south of Daulet Beg Oldi and demanded that India demolish bunkers some 250 km south in Chumar as these were reportedly a threat to the Chinese. After a standoff, India appears to have obliged.

Something similar is happening in Doko La, an area held by Indian troops near which the Chinese are trying to build a road through Bhutanese territory. Indian and Chinese troops are in a faceoff because India is intervening on behalf of Bhutan, with which India has a 50-year treaty.

The Chinese are trying to test the status quo here for a simple reason: technically, they are not encroaching on Indian territory or territory claimed by India, but doing it with Bhutan, which has no power to resist. If Bhutan and India cave in to this bullying, China will have moved its borders forward a wee bit. It will start believing that in an eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation, India will, often, blink first.

To be sure, China is operating from its own sense of weakness, despite apparent strength. It knows that with every passing year, its hopes of becoming hegemon of Asia will diminish. Seen from the Chinese side, the window of opportunity for it to act is narrow.

First, China knows that it enjoys relative impunity right now thanks to the space opened up by Donald Trump’s confused policies. The US policy on Asia is no longer coherent, and India cannot count on the Trump administration to come to its aid if attacked by China. The EU is mired in its own economic woes, and Russia has been bought off with Chinese business deals. Japan is not a military power, but will start developing its own defence over the next decade. If China wants to force any issue with India, it must do so in the next five years.

Second, China knows that India’s own internal weaknesses will take a while to sort out. It could take nearly a decade for our economy and military preparedness to rise to a level where it becomes invulnerable to Chinese threats.

This can happen during the 2022-2025 period, depending on our rates of growth. Currently, China’s GDP is about five times India’s in nominal dollar terms ($11.8 trillion versus India’s $2.5 trillion, according to the IMF), but only 2.5 times in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP, with China at $23 trillion and India at $9.4 trillion). By 2022 or 2025, India’s PPP-based GDP will be half of China’s.

This is why China is trying to flex its muscles now, when India is in a position of relative weakness. Five or 10 years later, both the Indian economy and the military will be too big for China to confront through force of arms. And the US and Europe may also be in better shape than now to rein in China.

Third, China also faces internal vulnerabilities, and again the time horizon for offensive external action is narrow. Its population growth is decelerating, and now rises at the annual rate of about 0.5 per cent, against India’s 1.2 per cent.

China’s working age population has been declining since 2012, and will fall 25 per cent by 2050. This means both a steady rise in wages, which will worsen its competitiveness, and a fall in the growth rate in future.

In contrast, India’s demography is in a sweet spot, and the working age population continues to rise. These are positive indicators for future growth.

Another concern is China’s excessive internal debt, which is now reckoned at 260 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP). This forced rating agency Moody’s to downgrade Chinese debt in May, and is indicative of the possibility that as growth slows, the debt problems could get worse.

China’s belt-and-road initiative is intended to create growth outside China by offering its Asian and African neighbours soft loans, which, in turn, will create construction opportunities for Chinese firms.

China believes that it must act while India is still not big enough. To strengthen its bargaining power with India, it is also buying out potential allies in the neighbourhood (Nepal, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, etc). The intrusion in Bhutan is intended to convey the same message. The bully is telling that tiny kingdom that partnering with India can be injurious to your health.

So, what should India’s response be?

One, we must bide our time. This is not the time for belligerence. We must talk softly, and keep beefing up your military power so that China knows it will get a bloody nose even if it has more firepower right now. This means avoiding unnecessary rhetoric in the public sphere, including in the media.

Two, we must engage China diplomatically to convey the sense that its belligerence can only be counter-productive. China, in fact, does not need to be told that if it attacks India, the rest of Asia will gang up against it despite its blandishments. So, targeting India will not help it anywhere.

Three, we must attempt to drive a wedge between Pakistan and China, China is turning a blind eye to this, because it is using Pakistan to get at India instead of acting on its own – except by offering pinpricks in Ladakh and now Bhutan. But as Chinese investments in Pakistan, including the port of Gwadar, increase, Chinese workers will be under threat from Pakistan’s various insurgencies on the western borders, including the restive Baloch freedom fight.

India needs to keep its head down and focus on building its own internal military and economic strengths for the next decade. After that, China can’t do much. We have to talk softly, and grow the size of our stick in the next decade.

Bullies need standing up to, but there is no need to talk loudly or lose eye-contact in the process.


 

Share is Caring, Choose Your Platform!

Receive Daily Updates

Stay updated with current events, tests, material and UPSC related news

Recent Posts

  • Context:-

    At the recently concluded Leaders’ Summit on Climate in April 2021, Lowering Emissions by Accelerating Forest Finance (LEAF) Coalition, a collective of the United States, United Kingdom and Norway governments, came up with a $1 billion fund plan that shall be offered to countries committed to arrest the decline of their tropical forests by 2030.

    [wptelegram-join-channel link=”https://t.me/s/upsctree” text=”Join @upsctree on Telegram”]

    What is LEAF Coalition?

    • Lowering Emissions by Accelerating Forest Finance (LEAF) Coalition, a collective of the United States, United Kingdom and Norway governments, came up with a $1 billion fund.
    • LEAF is supported by transnational corporations (TNCs) like Unilever plc, Amazon.com, Inc, Nestle, Airbnb, Inc as well as Emergent, a US-based non-profit.

    Why LEAF Coalition?

    • The world lost more than 10 million hectares of primary tropical forest cover last year, an area roughly the size of Switzerland.
    • Ending tropical and subtropical forest loss by 2030 is a crucial part of meeting global climate, biodiversity and sustainable development goals. Protecting tropical forests offers one of the biggest opportunities for climate action in the coming decade.
    • Tropical forests are massive carbon sinks and by investing in their protection, public and private players are likely to stock up on their carbon credits.
    • The LEAF coalition initiative is a step towards concretising the aims and objectives of the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) mechanism.
    • REDD+ was created by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). It monetised the value of carbon locked up in the tropical forests of most developing countries, thereby propelling these countries to help mitigate climate change.
    • It is a unique initiative as it seeks to help developing countries in battling the double-edged sword of development versus ecological commitment. 
    • The initiative comes at a crucial time. The tropics have lost close to 12.2 million hectares (mha) of tree cover last year according to global estimates released by Global Forest Watch.
    • Of this, a loss of 4.2 mha occurred within humid tropical primary forests alone. It should come as no surprise that most of these lost forests were located in the developing countries of Latin America, Africa and South Asia.
    • Brazil has fared dismally on the parameter of ‘annual primary forest loss’ among all countries. It has lost 1.7 mha of primary forests that are rich storehouse of carbon. India’s estimated loss in 2020 stands at 20.8 kilo hectares.

    Brazil & India 

    • Between 2002-2020, Brazil’s total area of humid primary forest reduced by 7.7 per cent while India’s reduced by 3.4 per cent.
    • Although the loss in India is not as drastic as in Brazil, its position is nevertheless precarious. For India, this loss is equivalent to 951 metric tonnes worth carbon dioxide emissions released in the atmosphere.
    • It is important to draw comparisons between Brazil and India as both countries have adopted a rather lackadaisical attitude towards deforestation-induced climate change. The Brazilian government hardly did anything to control the massive fires that gutted the Amazon rainforest in 2019.
    • It is mostly around May that forest fires peak in India. However, this year India, witnessed massive forest fires in early March in states like Odisha, Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh and Mizoram among others.
    • The European Union’s Copernicus Atmospheric Monitoring Service claimed that 0.2 metric tonnes of carbon was emitted in the Uttarakhand forest fires.

    According to the UN-REDD programme, after the energy sector, deforestation accounts for massive carbon emissions — close to 11 per cent — in the atmosphere. Rapid urbanisation and commercialisation of forest produce are the main causes behind rampant deforestation across tropical forests.

    Tribes, Forests and Government

    Disregarding climate change as a valid excuse for the fires, Indian government officials were quick to lay the blame for deforestation on activities of forest dwellers and even labelled them “mischievous elements” and “unwanted elements”.

    Policy makers around the world have emphasised the role of indigenous tribes and local communities in checking deforestation. These communities depend on forests for their survival as well as livelihood. Hence, they understand the need to protect forests. However, by posing legitimate environmental concerns as obstacles to real development, governments of developing countries swiftly avoid protection of forests and rights of forest dwellers.

    For instance, the Government of India has not been forthcoming in recognising the socio-economic, civil, political or even cultural rights of forest dwellers. According to data from the Union Ministry of Tribal Affairs in December, 2020 over 55 per cent of this population has still not been granted either individual or community ownership of their lands.  

    To make matters worse, the government has undertaken systematic and sustained measures to render the landmark Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 ineffective in its implementation. The Act had sought to legitimise claims of forest dwellers on occupied forest land.

    Various government decisions have seriously undermined the position of indigenous people within India. These include proposing amendments to the obsolete Indian Forest Act, 1927 that give forest officials the power to take away forest dwellers’ rights and to even use firearms with impunity.

    There is also the Supreme Court’s order of February, 2019 directing state governments to evict illegal encroachers of forest land or millions of forest dwellers inhabiting forests since generations as a measure to conserve wildlife. Finally, there is the lack of data on novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) deaths among the forest dwelling population;

    Tardy administration, insufficient supervision, apathetic attitude and a lack of political intent defeat the cause of forest dwelling populations in India, thereby directly affecting efforts at arresting deforestation.

    Way Forward

    • Implementation of the LEAF Coalition plan will help pump in fresh rigour among developing countries like India, that are reluctant to recognise the contributions of their forest dwelling populations in mitigating climate change.
    • With the deadline for proposal submission fast approaching, India needs to act swiftly on a revised strategy.
    • Although India has pledged to carry out its REDD+ commitments, it is impossible to do so without seeking knowledge from its forest dwelling population.

    Tuntiak Katan, a global indigenous leader from Ecuador and general coordinator of the Global Alliance of Territorial Communities, aptly indicated the next steps at the Climate Summit:

    “The first step is recognition of land rights. The second step is the recognition of the contributions of local communities and indigenous communities, meaning the contributions of indigenous peoples.We also need recognition of traditional knowledge practices in order to fight climate change”

    Perhaps India can begin by taking the first step.