A new word for Chinese diplomacy — ‘duplimacy’?

"China wants to develop long-term friendship and cooperation with India." So said the Chinese official who held border talks with Indian officials this week. He also predicted a "golden period for India-China relations" in the near future.

What he did not say, but sceptics like me heard him say between the lines, is that all this is possible only if it is done on China's terms.

What we heard between the lines is never uttered by China, but only demonstrated by its actions. So the real dichotomy lies between what China "says" and what China "does".

Just days before Chinese State Councillor Dai Bingguo's statement, the Chinese government had already shown that China will never budge from its policy towards the border issue. The Chinese government denied visa to an Indian Air Force officer who was to go as a member of the Indian military delegation to China on the ground that he was from Arunachal Pradesh, the Indian state claimed by China. This led to India scaling down its delegation from the original 30 members to 15.
At one point China even took a subtle step to show that it can, if it wants, consider Kashmiris, not as Indian citizens, but citizens of "Kashmir" by not stamping the visa on their Indian passports but issuing it on a separate paper.
These kind of moves by China are not limited only towards India. This is the underlying character of their dubious diplomacy, or shall we call it Chinese "duplimacy".
Last year, even Washington had to face Chinese "duplimacy". Just hours before then US Defence Secretary Robert Gates arrived in Beijing to improve military ties between the two powers, the Chinese military engaged in an unusual show of force by staging the test flight of their top secret new stealth fighter jet J-20. That was China's action. The words from China came later when President Hu Jintao and other civilian leaders gave Gates the impression that they were unaware of the test.

Some China experts feel that China shows this kind of arrogance because its adventures in the past against other nations were not nipped in the bud but were rather tolerated. Since there were no consequences, China keeps on flaunting its power in Asia.

In fact, ever since 1949 when China came under Communist rule, its history has been replete with aggressions.

In the Korean war, China sent in one million troops to defend North Korea against UN coalition forces. Then it attacked and took over an independent Tibetan kingdom. In 1962, China invaded and tried to get control of Indian territory. Seven years later it tried to invade across the Soviet border in the Damanskiy Island area. Then came the war of aggression against Vietnam in 1979.
But if you go by what China says, they are a peaceful nation that has no history of aggression. The fact is that by action they have always been the bully in the area, and their statements have always tried to portray them as a victim.

Anyway, history tells us that Beijing would not hesitate in using military force to secure its territory if the Chinese leaders believed such action is necessary. Most countries have wondered why China was rapidly building up its armed forces without acknowledging it.

The Chinese official who held border talks this week with India also rejected the notion of any rivalry between China and India. Now this is another statement that fits into the mould of China's "duplimacy". What he said can also mean that China considers it so far ahead of India that there isn't any rivalry to speak of. Does China think that India is naïve enough to be lulled into a slumber of complacency and really believe that there is no rivalry?

So may be what the Chinese official really meant was that it can be a "golden period for India-China relations", provided India shuns the rivalry and accepts China as the "daddy" in Asia.
But, apparently, India can never forget how it was bitten by the "Hindi Cheeni bhai bhai" bug in the Nehru era. So it should be twice shy and doubly prepared.

(The writer is a longtime South Asia observer. He has also headed the South Asia Desk in the Voice of America Newsroom in Washington)

Why India should avoid landing in hot waters of Hurmuz

As Iran and the United States move towards a standoff in the Strait of Hurmuz, India is going to find itself in a serious dilemma because of its close relations with both the countries. To use the old Greek mythological term, India will be caught precariously between the proverbial Scylla and Charybdis.

The US response to Iran's threat to block the Strait of Hurmuz could be diplomatic or military, but it would spell trouble for India's foreign policy. Why? Because then India will be forced to take sides, which it has brilliantly avoided so far by clubbing together a special foreign policy stance on the ongoing US pressure on Iran about what it sees as its nuclear weapons ambitions.

Considering its close energy and economic relations with Iran and its own nuclear weapon tests, India has so far refused to directly side with the US on its position that Iran must not be allowed to make the nuclear bomb.

India's stated policy has been that Iran is a close friend and has every right to develop nuclear energy but it should not make a nuclear bomb because it has already signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). And when questioned about its own nuclear bomb, India's argument is that it was justified in testing the bomb because New Delhi never signed the treaty.

So far this has proved to be a very smart policy. But now if the Iran/US situation grows suddenly into a stand-off in Hurmuz, then India will be compelled to do something it has avoided - take sides between Iran and the US.

India's relations with the US have never been closer. Especially after the Indo-US nuclear pact that allows India to buy nuclear fuel for its power plants from any member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Club. Considering India's efforts to develop blue water navy, there has also been a lot of discussion in Washington on how it can use India's help in keeping the Ocean lines in South Asia secured and open and also to put an end to the piracy in the Indian Ocean.

So there is no doubt that if push comes to shove in the strait of Hurmuz and the US moves its navy to prevent Iran from closing the international passage, it will need, and definitely ask for, India's help. And that is when India will be in hot waters because that will mean a direct defiance of Iran. And although Iran also needs India badly in Afghanistan, especially after the US troops leave in 2014, its relations with India obviously will be affected adversely if India took a stance against Iran in the Hurmuz crisis.

Besides trade worth billions of US dollars with Iran, New Delhi's relations with Tehran have also been based on shared geopolitical interests and security issues and also on India's latest strategic quest for "energy security" to maintain its more than seven percent growth rate. India has invested heavily in Iran's gas fields in its strategic efforts to control the global oil and gas resources.


Also, following President Barack Obama's decision to wind up the Afghan mission by 2014, India has sought Iran's crucial help in ensuring that its interests in Afghanistan remain unaffected after the US pullout. Iran also has a justifiable interest in Afghanistan being its neighbour and has already made inroads into the Hazara region of Afghanistan.

Obviously, despite the not-so-good relations that currently exist between Iran and Pakistan, Indian strategists are wary of possible Iranian policy shifts towards Pakistan.

So, with so much at stake, officials in New Delhi's South Block should be working overtime to tweak India's foreign policy in a way that it doesn't have to offend either the US or Iran. And only the coming weeks will tell how India emerges from this tight rope walk -- one of the tightest in international relations and regional diplomacy.

(01.01.2012 - Ravi M. Khanna is a Washington-based observer of South Asia. He has headed the South Asia Desk at Voice of America newsroom. He can be reached at ravitheactor@yahoo.com,http://www.ravithenewsmanonline.com)