On April 1, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) alluded to the “dragon-elephant” tango in his message to Indian President Droupadi Murmu to mark the 75th anniversary of the establishment of India-China diplomatic relations. The two countries have patched up after their border agreement in October last year, but the recent India-Pakistan tensions following the Pahalgam terror attack are testing the limits of their fragile truce.
Beijing’s moves in South Asia after the terror attack confirm the widely held view in the Indian community that last year’s border agreement was just a “tactical pause.” The tensions between India and Pakistan have uncovered China’s “tango” with India, as Beijing has thrown its weight fully behind Islamabad.
China is supporting Pakistan in an attempt to harm its competitors using other countries. Pakistan and North Korea (both went nuclear with China’s assistance) have been two strategic proxies helping China in its regional ambitions in south and east Asia. Beijing is trying to thwart New Delhi’s desire to be a global power and keep it bogged down by bolstering Islamabad.
China has three interests in its deep ties with Pakistan:
One, it helps Beijing avoid the internationalization of the Uighur issue through the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, in which Pakistan protects China’s record of targeting Uighurs in Xinjiang.
Second, it increases India’s vulnerability by raising the specter of a “two-front” war.
Third, Pakistan is the linchpin of China’s response to the US and India in the Indo-Pacific region. Things could become more complex for India, as the new dispensation in Bangladesh seems disposed toward China and Pakistan.
China offers Pakistan diplomatic and military protection at a time when the West’s interest in the country might be waning. Its support in the Kashmir issue and in Pakistan’s so-called “fight against terrorism” paints Islamabad’s use of terrorism as a state policy. It is no surprise that anti-India terrorists such as Hafiz Saeed, Masood Azhar or the Pakistani government do not utter a single word against the oppression of Uighurs in Xinjiang.
The “China-Pakistan tango” is now also extending to Eurasia. Azerbaijan had supported Pakistan’s “hollow” demand for a transparent investigation into the Pahalgam terror attack.
Islamabad had supplied weapons to Baku during its war with Armenia, which received military hardware from New Delhi. China had previously signed a partnership with Azerbaijan, an important country for the so-called Middle Corridor of the Belt and Road Initiative.
The Pakistan-China-Turkey cooperation is also of concern to India, as Ankara and Beijing supplied weapons to Pakistan after the Pahalgam attack. China and Turkey also have a history of supporting Pakistan at the Financial Action Task Force, despite well-known Pakistani links to terrorism.
India conducted its “Operation Sindoor” on Wednesday last week. Azerbaijan and Turkey supported Pakistan, while China said it “regretted” India’s military operation against Pakistan-based terrorists.
Before India’s operation, China not only supported Pakistan’s call for an independent probe in the Pahalgam attack, but also backed its “legitimate security concerns and its efforts to safeguard its security and strategic interests.”
The double standards in China’s approach are quite clear.
In contrast to China’s response, the US supported India’s right to self-defense. President William Lai (賴清德) also condemned the attack on Indian civilians, saying that “our hearts are with the people of India.” Russia and Israel have backed India amid the ongoing tensions as well.
India would have to factor in the new developments in the “China-Pakistan” nexus in the Indo-Pacific region and in Eurasia. It would also need to bolster its ties with Taiwan, the US, France, Russia, Japan, Australia, Greece, Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Armenia and Afghanistan.
Raj Kumar Sharma is Ministry of Foreign Affairs Taiwan fellow at National Chengchi University. Geetanjali Atri is a sociologist based in Taipei.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
RSS