Foreign secretary level talks indicate that New Delhi and Beijing are on their way to resolving differences over India’s NSG membership
New Delhi: Foreign Secretary S Jaishankar
addressing the Implementation and Assessment Group Meeting of the Global
Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism (GICNT), in New Delhi on
Wednesday. PTI Photo by Manvender Vashist
Strategic patience is a virtue in statecraft. But it is not about
passive and endless waiting. It demands persistent pursuit of one’s
goals and seizing the moment when the circumstances turn more
favourable. It has certainly come to define India’s recent engagement
with China. Foreign Secretary S. Jaishankar’s conversations in Beijing
last week with senior Chinese officials offer the first glimmer of hope
that India’s patience might begin to pay off. The downturn in bilateral
relations over the last year was marked by China’s decision to block
India’s campaign for the membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG)
and putting Pakistan’s Masood Azhar (of the Jaish-e-Mohammed) on the
terror list of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). Delhi was
certainly surprised by the intensity and inflexibility of Beijing’s
approach to the two issues
Although Beijing presented its objections in procedural terms, Delhi
knew Beijing’s opposition was political. China’s sense of its own rise
and a growing political clout in the multilateral arena seemed to
convince Beijing that it was under no obligation to make nice with
Delhi. After all, the current power differential between the two nations
had become too glaring. China’s GDP is now nearly five times larger
than that of India and its defence spending is three times bigger. That
Delhi and Beijing are peers has long been an unstated assumption of
India’s China policy. But Delhi now had to adapt to the political
consequences of growing strategic asymmetry
Delhi, however, held its nerve and chose to persist with a two-fold
approach. One was to continue the campaign for the membership of the NSG
and putting Masood Azhar on UNSC’s terror list. The other was to take
up China’s opposition at every diplomatic encounter — bilateral and
multilateral — with Beijing. Despite repeated collisions with the
Chinese wall, Delhi refused to give up. Last week’s positive soundings
from the first round of the newly instituted strategic dialogue suggest
Delhi’s patience and firm persistence on the two issues might have been
worthwhile.
On its part, Beijing signaled its readiness to make the first round
of strategic dialogue purposeful and the two sides prepared for a
substantive discussion. The level of engagement, the breadth of the
issues covered and the depth of discussions underlined the new
commitment to limit the recent damage to bilateral relations. Setting
the stage for last week’s conversation was the Trump factor that
threatens to upend all assumptions on where the world is headed. If
Delhi and Beijing had thought Trump’s election rhetoric would be mere
posturing, they have been taken aback by the determination of the new
president to change America’s course. The Trump discontinuity, Delhi and
Beijing know, demands some fresh thinking in both capitals. Facile
notions of linear and inevitable rise of China and India must now be
tempered by the prospect for extraordinary geopolitical disruption.
As Jaishankar told the press in Beijing, “both India and China have
been beneficiaries of a stable and open international system” and
underlined the importance of limiting the impact of the current
international turbulence on their respective national interests. “One
thing that we could do together,” Jaishankar added, was to work for a
“more stable, substantive, forward looking India-China relationship
which would inject a greater amount of predictability into the
international system.”
The positive characterisation of last week’s talks by both sides does
not mean the multiple divergences can be bridged any time soon. Some
issues like the boundary dispute, trade deficit, and the One Belt, One
Road initiative, where the differences between the two sides are too
deep, are not amenable to easy or early resolution. But others like
India’s NSG membership are not too hard to resolve. The hints from
Beijing that China is more open on this question are welcome. So are the
continuing talks on international terrorism and the discussion on
potential for cooperation in stabilising Afghanistan.
Delhi’s current realism on China is a welcome departure from the
past, when India used hide problems in the grandiose rhetoric on global
solidarity. Under the new approach, there is no fudging of differences.
Nor would Delhi throw up its hands in despair. The Indian emphasis is on
perseverance with China that puts self-interest above ideology and
seeks common ground wherever possible