From Panchsheel to SCO | India’s long arc of misplaced optimism

While Nehru’s misplaced idealism with China could still be attributed to naivety born of the moment and time when realpolitik hadn’t normalised with matters pertaining to China, to act now with same optimism is surprising to say the least

Following the signing of Panchsheel Agreement (Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence) in 1954, Jawaharlal Nehru (in)famously coined ‘Hindi Chini Bhai Bhai’ (Indians and Chinese are brothers). His romantic idealism was spurred prematurely by the hopes of two recently independent nations.

The five principles included mutual respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity, and non-aggression towards each other, among other principles. This was to be the foundation of many subsequent naiveties that were afflicted as rude shocks with the Chinese aggression in the 1962 India-China War.

It shook New Delhi from the dreamy illusions of rosy optics, empty promises, and political loftiness. Beijing was to confirm its patent malintent towards New Delhi ever since, be it by aligning with forces inimical towards India (read, Pakistan) in every subsequent opportunity and moment of vulnerability e.g., India-Pakistan wars of 1965, 1971, 1999, and most recently, earlier this year by standing in favour of Islamabad during Operation Sindoor.

In a pivotal moment of strategic recalibration, it took the maverick George Fernandes as the defence minister to declare that China was indeed India’s “potential threat number one”. It was a controversial though prescient observation in 1998 as China had yet to emerge from its shadows (the Xi Jinping era hadn’t started).

Many traditionalists chastised Fernandes to be alarmist and ‘adventurist’ with Beijing expectedly slamming the surprising observation as ‘ridiculous and unworthy of refutation’. Later date events like the chilly Doklam standoff and the bloody Galwan Valley clashes were to prove prophetic. Fernandes had also pointed to the political meekness (again to be proved right after all these years) in calling out China, in the same easy way that Pakistan was called-out by insisting, “I think there is a reluctance to face the reality that China's intentions need to be questioned”.

Recent years had started conflating China with Pakistan in terms of threat imagination and assessment with talks of plausible ‘two-front war’ et al. Even though the top executive office of the land preferred to inexplicably and strangely avoid naming ‘China’ specifically — the job of sabre-rattling and chest-thumping was left to lesser minsters, ideologues, and ‘fringe elements’ to spin-doctor a powerful Indian response to China in the aftermath of the 2020 clashes.

Yet, the same bloody summer of 2020, where at least 20 Indian troops were killed (including a commanding officer) and the subsequent brave talk of the defence minister, “Koi hummey laal aankh dikhakar bach nahi sakta” (No one can dare show us the red eye and hope to get away) have seemingly, all but forgotten as Prime Minister Narendra Modi incredulously cosied up to Xi Jinjing at the recently-concluded Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) meet in Tianjin, China.

In a bizarre recalibration of friends and enemies, majority of the Indian media went into overdrive to posit the ‘strong Indian response’ (this time towards the United States of America) to drum up the continuing ‘masterstrokes’ by the dispensation of the day.

If that meant, recklessly overlooking the wounded corridors of history with China (including as recently as 2020), then so be it! There just weren’t enough voices to question the Indian leadership’s volte-face (read, succumbing) with Xi, as he cavalierly held court at the SCO.

The same political class that had gone to town to establish a narrative of the previous ruling party having signed some mysterious agreement with the Chinese Communist Party or even having ostensibly received funds from the same (even though oddly enough the government did not pursue either of the matters to prove the accusation) are now unconcerned with the change of goal-post in terms of sovereign ‘enemies’.

The fact that the Indian dispensation had earlier gone overboard with enthusiastic supporting of the same Donald Trump that irks now (remember, Abki Baar Trump Sarkar) is given to a selective and convenient amnesia, in terms of questioning the failure to read and manage the Trump administration, correctly.

Even if it were to be on rebound-mode against Trump, the language spoken by the Indian delegation at the SCO was incredulously obsequious and obliging toward a neighbour against which, a very different rhetoric was getting bandied. On the cue, the Ministry of External Affairs clarified, “China and India are partners, not rivals”. Modi valourised Xi’s favourite agenda of multipolarity and committed to not let third-parties (read, the US) influence the bilateral relations with China!

A de rigueur statement condemning terrorism with ‘zero tolerance’ for the same, and a call to act decisively against terror networks without naming Pakistan, was enthusiastically contextualised as getting Xi to be on New Delhi’s side. However, China along with Türkiye and Azerbaijan, were among the rare nations who stood steadfast against India during Operation Sindoor, but the mealy-mouthed referencing of terrorism was projected back home as New Delhi’s thumping success with the Pakistani leadership in the audience.

Portents hark back to Nehru’s lament on China’s betrayal in 1962, with him calling it a “betrayal of faith” and attack as a “stab in the back”. While Nehru’s misplaced idealism with China could still be attributed to naivety born of the moment and time when realpolitik hadn’t normalised with matters pertaining to China – but in the times of Zhongguo Shijji or the neologism of ‘Chinese Century’ — to act now with same optimism is surprising to say the least!

Reacting strongly to Trump’s unwarranted actions and his own ‘stab in the back’ towards his ostensible friend is one thing, but for that to optically align with China is altogether, another blind leap. While for China to extend the olive branch to New Delhi is not the same as New Delhi now currying favours with China, as it was always China that was the aggressor and usurper who got the better of India, unfairly.

Xi would privately gloat at the assembly of the ‘unlikely’ with a room full of Russia, India, Pakistan, Türkiye, etc., under the aegis of China. History is instructive of caution to deny a redux of inevitabilities with China.

Lt Gen (Retd) Bhopinder Singh is former lieutenant governor of Puducherry and Andaman & Nicobar Islands.

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.