Connect with us

Politics

Did India spoil the party for China before the CCP’s 100th anniversary? What Xi won’t say

Avatar

Published

on


President Xi Jinping (center) with other Chinese Communist Party leaders |  Representative image: Reuters via ANI
President Xi Jinping (center) with other Chinese Communist Party leaders | Representative image: Reuters via ANI

Text size:

TThe Chinese Communist Party will celebrate its 100th anniversary later in July, a hugely significant achievement for a nation that through its will and hard work has passed through decades of poverty to reach the top of the world pyramid. Harrison salisburys The new emperors begins with a memorable tale of disheveled but amazed Chinese soldiers, having overcome Chiang Kai-Shek and other internal challenges, finally arriving in Beijing in 1949; without a doubt, they anticipate the growing fortune of the Communist Party to which they lost their life.

Cut to the present as Indian and Chinese soldiers undertake a trust and verification disengagement in the High Himalayas of Ladakh, starting with the northern and southern shores of Pangong Tso. The withdrawal is also taking place from the Kailash Range, which Indian soldiers climbed in late August, catching the Chinese by surprise. This key maneuver is widely believed to have helped shift the direction of the ongoing confrontation in favor of India.

Defense Minister Rajnath Singhs’ measured statement to Parliament on gradual disengagement is, rightly, not a declaration of victory, it is too early for that. No, it expresses the determination that India is ready to talk to the Chinese until the cows return home, but not under forced aggression.

Additionally, although Singh did not use the phrase status quo ante in his statement, he made it clear that both sides would resume their positions before the April 2020 assault.

Imagine the headlines, including in the Communist Party Global Times, who loves to taunt India for the slightest trifle, however, since the disengagement announcement there have been very few.

Its famous publisher, Hu Xijin, has been slow to reject an Indo-American partnership based on democratic values. His hypocrite and empty is what he called, but he didn’t say a word about the objectives of the border aggression or why the soldiers are now withdrawing from Ladakh.


Also read: India and the United States must know that the New Cold War is a different beast China is not the USSR


Politico-military complementarity

So who made the first call by offering an olive branch? Some say it was the Indian side that repeated a simple message to the Chinese for nine months: you are ruining the relationship with another Asian country. You may be the strongest economic power, but India is not backing down. Let’s go back to the principles you signed off on, namely not to disturb the peace and quiet on the Line of Real Control (LAC).

Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar, who served as Ambassador to China for five years before becoming Foreign Minister and then joining politics, noticed how China’s aggression across the LAC region in Ladakh deeply disrupted the relationship and offered 8 consultations and 3 mutuals to resolve it. .

Behind the declared determination of the foreign ministers was, of course, the political will expressed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Rajnath Singh. But a fourth player, who has stayed on the sidelines so far, is the army chief, General MM Naravane, who is said to have supported the political vision by insisting that the army has the will and the means of blocking the Chinese.

Remember that General Naravane is a Chinese hand, was Defense Attaché in Myanmar and has extensive experience in counterinsurgency in the North East and Kashmir. (He’s, no doubt, keeping a close eye on the changing dynamics of the coup in Myanmar these days.) A thoughtful soldier, Naravane recently gave India a voice, a troubling delivery deficit to promises connectivity in a speech to the defense think tank, United Services Institute, and underscored an unstable regional security environment characterized by Chinese belligerence.

China’s growing footprint in the Indian neighborhood and its attempts to unilaterally change the status quo along our contested borders have created an environment of confrontation and mutual mistrust, Naravane said.

So when the Chinese raised the bar by mobilizing just across the LAC shortly after the Galwan Valley clash on June 15-16 in which 20 Indian soldiers lost their lives and according to the Russian news agency Tass, 45 Chinese soldiers were killed, General Naravanes Army replied Right-back. From Ladakh in the western sector to Arunachal Pradesh in the eastern sector, the Indian army has been mobilized to prevent any further aggression.

What is less known is that the Indian soldiers are much more seasoned than the Chinese, they have held the heights of Siachen against Pakistan since 1984 under terrible conditions; the 14th Corps commander in Leh is dealing with both Siachen and Ladakh. As the Chinese soldiers trained Tibet Qinghai Plateau to acclimate to the freezing cold conditions in Ladakh, they had hotpot which were delivered to them by drones and had access to supplemental oxygen from bedside generators, they are believed to spin faster than Indian soldiers.

The willingness of the Indian armies to stand up to the Chinese has given political leaders the space to stand firm. As the rest of the world watched, India, with a fifth of China’s economy, faced off against the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in Ladakh.

Imagine the impact on China’s reputation when President Xi Jinping and the rest of the Central Committee meet in July to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the founding of the CCP with Indian troops still breathless with the Chinese?


Also read: Ladakh shows that Russia will not choose between India and China. He does not want


What China must be asking

On December 24 and 25, the president Xi assembled the Politburo for a meeting of democratic life, in which the 25 members were supposed to engage in self-criticism in order to strengthen the CCP and the nation, which was to take over as the largest economy in the world in 2028, five years before it is planned to do so.

The theme of this session was to seriously learn the thought of unique socialism in China in the new era of Xi Jinping. Which means that the CCP leader was telling his comrades that they had better follow his path for them, dissent, of course, would meet the Chinese version of the Gulag.

It is not known whether the Ladakh aggression was discussed during the Politburo session or whether President Xi engaged in some self-criticism and rectification. Meanwhile, two articles from the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations (CICIR), an influential think tank directly controlled by China’s Foreign Intelligence and Security Ministry, the Ministry of State Security, provide insight into the Chinese thought on the subject.

The first article, dated August 2020, says decoupling of the border problem of the overall relationship is the fundamental principle to be respected. The Indian side did the exact opposite, telling the Chinese that border assault would be held hostage to the whole relationship if they didn’t back down.

A more recent piece of Hu Shishengin CICIR, written after Indian soldiers scaled the Kailash Range, is more telling. It refers to India’s tough foreign policy characterized by high risk and high return, carried out by the Modi administration towards China. Subsequent measures of India’s bitter diplomacy towards China became more frequent, reflecting both a desire for revenge and a deep level of Indian logic, and therefore, the time has come for China and India to restructure their relationships, otherwise their relationship can hardly be continued.

Hu Shisheng is not ordinary Chinese strategist. He is Director of the CICIR Institute in South Asia, holds a BA in Hindi and an MA in Sanskrit and Pali from Peking University. What he says is certainly a reflection of the fact that the CCP thinks it was approved by the authorities, to be sure.

It seems that the penny has finally come down in Beijing that the Modi government does not give in to aggression from China.

In 2003, when Atal Bihari Vajpayee visited Beijing, a Special Representative mechanism was set up to discuss the border, mutually give and receive, and resolve the problem left by history. But 18 years have passed and there has been no movement. China’s attempt to try to change the shape of the border has also not worked.

So what does China want? Does he want to live in true peace with his neighbors or impose a difficult truce, simply because he is the strongest nation economically and militarily? As the CCP celebrates its 100th anniversary, Xi Jinping and the party must ask themselves this question.

Opinions are personal.

Subscribe to our channels on Youtube & Telegram

Why the news media is in crisis and how to fix it

India needs even more free, fair, open-ended, questioning journalism in the face of multiple crises.

But the news media are in a crisis of their own. There have been brutal layoffs and pay cuts. The best of journalism is dwindling, giving way to crass spectacle in prime time.

ThePrint has the best young reporters, columnists and editors working for it. To support journalism of this quality, smart, thoughtful people like you have to pay for it. Whether you live in India or abroad, you can do it here.

Support our journalism