National Security Adviser Shiv Shankar Menon and State Councilor Dai Bingguo will hold the discussions amidst expectations that the talks will go beyond managing differences and will facilitate addressing the emerging challenges in the economic and strategic fields.
More than New Delhi, it is Beijing which has a vested interest in making the dialogue meaningful and productive. It is therefore heartening that Dai Bingguo has acknowledged that gaps in understanding persisted between the two neighbours, which together had presented to the world Panchasdeel – the five principles that should guide relations between countries in the present day.
As the senior most official on foreign policy matters in the Chinese hierarchy, Dai’s word is heard with attention and indeed with respect at home and abroad. So much so when he told a gathering at the Indian embassy in Beijing on Wednesday, Jan 11 that let’s “forever be good neighbours, good friends and good partners, he appears to reflect the thinking at the highest levels of his country. This remark, and the four –pronged approach he had laid out in that speech to improve ties with India don’t jell well with what may be called the lows that keep appearing in the bilateral ties.
These lows, for instance, the rough treatment Indian business men reportedly receive often at the hands of their Chinese hosts cannot be brushed aside as aberrations. It is because if India looks towards China as a market for outsourcing intermediaries and even finished products, China is increasingly banking on India as its major export destination for services and products.
It is no exaggeration to say that the fortunes of a large number of Chinese giants, engineers and workers are inexplicably linked to the growth rates of India’s infrastructure sector and even the famed IT sector. In a broad sense, there is not only mutuality but also commonality of interests between the countries which are on the growth super highway, notwithstanding the impact of the downslide in the dollar economies.
Therefore timely and relevant is Dai Bingguo’s call for both countries to settle their disputes “wisely, calmly and properly” to prevent them from becoming barriers to an expanding relationship. Delhi clearly demonstrated its commitment to this approach by not allowing the Yiwu raw deal to escalate into a diplomatic row.
It is natural for Delhi to expect Beijing to display similar understanding and maturity in its reactions to events in India, more so when the government on Raisina Hill cannot do and appear to do what a Chinese government can do and thereby invite the wrath of civil society, judiciary and parliament.
Undoubtedly, had such dictum been at play, the 15th round of border talks could have been held as scheduled in November itself. The talks were postponed with a cryptic half truth that dates for the next round of border talks “have yet to be decided.”
Neither side elaborated but frankly no elaboration was required because the announcement came against the backdrop of objections to a Buddhist conference being held in Delhi around then. It was an international conference that has very little to do with Official Delhi. Being a Buddhist meet, the presence of Tibetan spiritual leader Dalai Lama was natural. He is not a new entity on the Indian scene. Nor is he new to Chinese and they have been in touch with him in innumerable ways.
More over, the Dalai Lama cannot be wished away. Not even the Tibet and Buddhist concerns but these cannot be made centric to India-China ties in the 21st century when relations between nations refuse to be hostage to history, ideology or hiccups of any kind. But the Chinese Foreign Ministry deemed it fair and proper to raise objections saying that the Dalai Lama was “not a purely religious figure at a religious conference”. This stand is to refuse to acknowledge the changes voluntarily brought in by the Dalai Lama particularly his giving up of ‘temporal powers’ in March 2011.
And when China insisted that the Buddhist meet should either be cancelled or rescheduled, it was making a demand to the wrong party. Indian government has limited say in such events even if its help was sought and secured by the organizers at the outset. Well, that is democracy in action.
Against this backdrop, Dai Bingguo’s emphasis on ‘practical cooperation’ in economy, trade and finance and on ‘people-to-people exchanges is a positive signal ahead of the Jan 15 talks.
The Special Representative (SR) level talks were last held a year ago and that dialogue followed Manmohan Singh- Wen Jiabao meeting in Hanoi on the sidelines of the ASEAN summit in November, 2010. The two Prime Ministers had asked the SRs to “press ahead with the framework negotiations” in line with the political parameters and guiding principles agreed upon during Wen’s visit to India in 2005. That visit heralded the end of the first stage of the long-running India-China border talks.
Now the SR negotiations are entering the more complex second phase that involves agreeing upon a framework and then specifics of delineating the border. Both sides will finalize a mechanism of direct contact between the two capitals in cases involving intrusions or incidents resulting from misperceptions on the Line of Actual Control (LAC).
