India and China need to listen to each other’s concerns

The priorities do not align: Beijing wants to improve people-to-people connect, New Delhi wants to resolve the border issue

On March 25, India and China concluded the 33rd round of the Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination on India-China Border Affairs (WMCC) in Beijing, China. Meetings were held between Indian Joint Secretary Gourangalal Das and Hong Liang, the Director General of the Boundary and Oceanic Affairs Department of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Indian side also met Hong Lei, the Assistant Foreign Minister.

It was agreed that both sides will undergo ‘substantial preparation’ for the next Special Representatives Meeting (SRM) to be held in India later this year. This meeting was aimed at looking at ways to implement and take forward the decisions undertaken during the December SRM.

There has been an uptick in India-China meetings since the talks of disengagement on the border in October. Both sides have also started patrolling in the Demchok and Depsang in Eastern Ladakh. It was after this that the leaders of the two countries met, and finally some hope of a thaw was perceived after a gap of four-and-a-half years since the violent clashes in Galwan.

However, both sides are talking in parallel, whereby no substantial achievement can be perceived because the two are still not exactly listening to each other. While New Delhi has been keen on keeping the resolution of the border as the primary factor for improving ties, Beijing’s focus is on expanding people-to-people contact. China is keen on the resumption of direct flights. There were talks on resumption of the Kailash Mansarover yatra and sharing of transboundary river data, the modalities of which are yet to be finalised.

Though talks and meetings between India and China are crucial given the size and impact of these economies, do we still understand each other, and are both sides ready to acknowledge each other’s concerns?

In a move to improve ties, China has issued around 50,000 visas to Indian travellers and has even adopted measures to simplify the process. This is done to encourage Indian tourists as well as push for the resumption of contact between scholars and businessmen. This clearly indicates China’s focus.

The recent statements made by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on a podcast, asserting that “the ancient cultural and civilisational ties between India and China” and the fact that “there was never a conflict between the two ancient neighbours in its several millenia-old history” have been welcomed by Beijing. China acknowledged that the “dragon-elephant dance co-operation is the only correct choice for the two neighbours”.

Civilisational connect is a thing of the past, and one cannot ignore the reality that India and China are two modern states which have existing differences that need to be resolved.

If one is to analyse the ties, one gets a sense that it lacks a truly bilateral nature of engagement and focus. How India and China have interacted as modern nation states is generally perceived through a third party. Even the recent resumption of talks has been analysed through the prism of the election of Donald Trump as US president and how Trump’s proposed tariffs will impact Chinese trade and economy.

One cannot shake the feeling that even after multiple rounds of talks, India alone as a neighbour does not carry too much weight in the Chinese foreign policy and decision making. For Beijing, New Delhi is still a regional player and is relevant only in the context of South Asia. In the Chinese mindset, the gap and disparity in the form of military might and economic strength between the neighbours makes India not central in its policy making.

No surprises then that even after multiple rounds of talks between the two neighbours, the gap between what each side wants is obvious. For India, the border is central to its relationship with China as it challenges its sovereignty as well as credibility. For Beijing, the border is an issue that needs to be managed, not immediately resolved.

Gunjan Singh is Associate Professor, OP Jindal Global University.

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