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.


 

Receive Daily Updates

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

Recent Posts

    2021 WEF Global Gender Gap report, which confirmed its 2016 finding of a decline in worldwide progress towards gender parity.

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

    Over 2.8 billion women are legally restricted from having the same choice of jobs as men. As many as 104 countries still have laws preventing women from working in specific jobs, 59 countries have no laws on sexual harassment in the workplace, and it is astonishing that a handful of countries still allow husbands to legally stop their wives from working.

    Globally, women’s participation in the labour force is estimated at 63% (as against 94% of men who participate), but India’s is at a dismal 25% or so currently. Most women are in informal and vulnerable employment—domestic help, agriculture, etc—and are always paid less than men.

    Recent reports from Assam suggest that women workers in plantations are paid much less than men and never promoted to supervisory roles. The gender wage gap is about 24% globally, and women have lost far more jobs than men during lockdowns.

    The problem of gender disparity is compounded by hurdles put up by governments, society and businesses: unequal access to social security schemes, banking services, education, digital services and so on, even as a glass ceiling has kept leadership roles out of women’s reach.

    Yes, many governments and businesses had been working on parity before the pandemic struck. But the global gender gap, defined by differences reflected in the social, political, intellectual, cultural and economic attainments or attitudes of men and women, will not narrow in the near future without all major stakeholders working together on a clear agenda—that of economic growth by inclusion.

    The WEF report estimates 135 years to close the gap at our current rate of progress based on four pillars: educational attainment, health, economic participation and political empowerment.

    India has slipped from rank 112 to 140 in a single year, confirming how hard women were hit by the pandemic. Pakistan and Afghanistan are the only two Asian countries that fared worse.

    Here are a few things we must do:

    One, frame policies for equal-opportunity employment. Use technology and artificial intelligence to eliminate biases of gender, caste, etc, and select candidates at all levels on merit. Numerous surveys indicate that women in general have a better chance of landing jobs if their gender is not known to recruiters.

    Two, foster a culture of gender sensitivity. Take a review of current policies and move from gender-neutral to gender-sensitive. Encourage and insist on diversity and inclusion at all levels, and promote more women internally to leadership roles. Demolish silos to let women grab potential opportunities in hitherto male-dominant roles. Work-from-home has taught us how efficiently women can manage flex-timings and productivity.

    Three, deploy corporate social responsibility (CSR) funds for the education and skilling of women and girls at the bottom of the pyramid. CSR allocations to toilet building, the PM-Cares fund and firms’ own trusts could be re-channelled for this.

    Four, get more women into research and development (R&D) roles. A study of over 4,000 companies found that more women in R&D jobs resulted in radical innovation. It appears women score far higher than men in championing change. If you seek growth from affordable products and services for low-income groups, women often have the best ideas.

    Five, break barriers to allow progress. Cultural and structural issues must be fixed. Unconscious biases and discrimination are rampant even in highly-esteemed organizations. Establish fair and transparent human resource policies.

    Six, get involved in local communities to engage them. As Michael Porter said, it is not possible for businesses to sustain long-term shareholder value without ensuring the welfare of the communities they exist in. It is in the best interest of enterprises to engage with local communities to understand and work towards lowering cultural and other barriers in society. It will also help connect with potential customers, employees and special interest groups driving the gender-equity agenda and achieve better diversity.