Keeping up its belligerent rhetoric over the Taiwan visit by US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, China also took an unusual step in asking many countries to renew their vows, as it were, to the “one China” policy.
While many of the vassal states that depend on Chinese funding for projects in their countries promptly recited the “one China” policy, one country did not follow Beijing’s demand to reiterate the “one China commitment.” That country is India.
Indians have been venting their anger against China since June 2020, when China and India clashed in the Galwan Valley along the so-called Line of Actual Control in the Himalayan terrain.
Although trade and business ties are still strong and the actual fighting has stopped, New Delhi is upset that Chinese soldiers have not yet fully vacated certain strategic points they occupied after the clashes.
Those skirmishes in India have dented China’s image among the majority of nearly 1.4 billion Indians, who have been raging against China on various news and social media platforms. The Indian government also faces public pressure to stand up to China.
Senior politicians of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party and the opposition Indian National Congress party have said that if China continues to needle India at every international platform, India should strive for a closer relationship with Taiwan, and not remain closeted in its “one China” policy.
Shashi Tharoor, chairman of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Information Technology and member of the Indian National Congress party, urged in media interviews for India to play the “Taiwan card” and upgrade its contacts with the nation.
Indian politicians and the public are also incensed by China’s attempt to block India’s move at the UN to sanction a known Pakistan-based terrorist.
In the UN Security Council, China said it had “put on hold” India’s move to get the deputy chief of Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM), a Pakistan-based extremist group, designated by the UN as a terrorist organization.
The man in question, Abdul Rauf Azhar, has been under US sanctions since December 2010 for acting for or on behalf of the JEM group.
India said Azhar was involved in the planning and execution of numerous terror attacks, including the 1999 hijacking of an Indian Airlines aircraft, the 2001 attack on the Indian Parliament and the 2016 attack on an Indian Air Force base in Pathankot.
In newspaper comments, Indian readers have urged the Indian government to recognize Taiwan and establish formal diplomatic ties. Some interpreted China’s UN Security Council “hold” as “indirect support” for a known and internationally sanctioned terrorist.
China’s UN mission in New York tried to put “things in perspective” and explained that it needed more time to “study” the case before it could decide on sanctions. The mission said that the security council committee that monitors sanctions allows such proposals to be put on hold.
India has also demonstrated its annoyance with Beijing’s attitude. When New Delhi was asked in a Web site post by Chinese Ambassador to India Sun Weidong (孫衛東) to reiterate its allegiance to the “one China” principle, many Indians saw it as a “diktat” and India did not respond explicitly.
It is clear that China was unnerved by Pelosi’s Taiwan visit, and also by anti-China sentiments expressed by Indian politicians and the Indian public.
India has in the past committed to the “one China” principle, but it has not mentioned it in bilateral documents or in public statements for a long time, creating doubts in the minds of China’s policymakers. To many, India appears to not explicitly enforce the “one China” principle.
Indeed, Indian Ministry of External Affairs spokesman Arindam Bagchi has only said that “India’s relevant policies are well known and consistent. They do not require reiteration.”
He did not specifically mention the “one China” policy, but instead called to exercise restraint, avoid unilateral action to change the status quo, de-escalate tensions and maintain efforts to preserve peace and stability in the region.
This was clearly addressed to China, urging it to refrain from invading Taiwan.
The reverberations of Bagchi’s remarks were also felt in far-flung places such as New York, London and Tokyo.
Indian scholars on China also note that New Delhi has not publicly mentioned its adherence to the “one China” policy since 2008, when Beijing reiterated its claim over India’s northeastern state of Arunachal Pradesh and began issuing “stapled” visas to applicants from Jammu and Kashmir.
During former Chinese premier Wen Jiabao’s (溫家寶) visit to India in December 2010, India did not mention support for the “one China” policy in the joint communique.
However, relations soured after the June 2020 clashes on the Himalayan border, in which 20 Indian and four Chinese soldiers were killed. Both sides maintain high levels of troop deployment, while military and diplomatic talks continue to defuse the situation.
Taiwan should extend its reach in India by increasing trade and investments, as China has done. India has attracted about US$17 billion in Chinese investment. Taiwan’s investment and trade profile in this region, when compared with that of China, looks weak.
The bilateral investment agreement signed between Taipei and New Delhi is a good framework for Taiwan to increase its flow of investments and technology. India is keen to attract technology and investments from Taiwan’s semi-conductor and other high-tech industries.
Business, technology and cultural exchanges are promising areas for India and Taiwan to build an unassailable partnership.
India has previously maintained a low-key approach toward Taiwan because of China’s sensitivity.
However, as India’s own economic and military might grows, it might no longer be able to tolerate its eastern neighbor’s belligerence.
The Russia-Ukraine conflict has created uncertainty about the liberal international order. Experts have questioned whether the Russia-Ukraine conflict could encourage China to embark on misadventures against its neighbors’ territories, including India and Taiwan.
However, the international community’s strong sanctions against Russia could dissuade China from committing any territorial aggression. Russia’s losses and its international isolation have not gone unnoticed by China, which with its strong links to global supply chains could face huge trade and economic upheavals.
China has also noted Ukraine’s fierce resistance to Russian aggression, and the resulting human and material losses suffered by Russia. The continuation of US arms delivered to Taiwan would have created some apprehensions in China.
New Delhi should significantly raise the profile of India-Taiwan relations and, following in the vein of the Pelosi visit, should send high-ranking delegations to Taiwan. They could also invite Taiwanese politicians to India. As a sovereign country, India should not bow to China’s diktat.
Manik Mehta is a New York-based journalist specializing in foreign affairs, US bilateral ties, the UN and global economics.
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
RSS