INDIA-CHINA RELATIONS AND NEOLIBERAL INSTITUTIONALIST PERSPECTIVE

Introduction

India and China have received much attention in recent years among academic scholarship due to its competitive pattern of relationship. Proponents of both the realist and Liberal Institutionalist School have come up with their contradictory assessment of their connection. Both these contrasting paradigms address the cooperative to conflictual elements in their relationship that officially began on April 01, 1950 when India became first non-socialistic bloc country to establish diplomatic friendship with People’s Republic of China. Today, Beijing and New Delhi are two of the most important countries both at the global and regional level in both economic and military sense. Not only are two countries big in terms of their geographical size but also unmatched in terms of their population. The increased significance of their bilateral relationship is primarily due to their diplomatic and economic influence on the rest of the world. The dynamic relationship between India and China can be best understood through the element of geopolitics in the changing times. Their intersecting interests in Asia also bring them to the spotlight. In the present scenario, a Great Game seems at play between these two rising powers. The logic of great game was originally conceived during the period of nineteenth century. The idea of Great Game was the representation of geopolitical confrontation that existed between the British and Russian empire.

As per the Realist outlook, these Asian powers are locked in an asymmetric security dilemma that is characterised by mistrust and ambiguity. There are two major concerns from the perspectives of Indian scholarship. The first one includes the growing military power of China in the context of unresolved boundary dispute, creating insecurity and need for balancing by India through aligning with external actor like USA and secondly, is with regard to China’s growing presence in South Asia and its patron client relationship Patron client relations is a form of politics where a patron grants favours in return for political support. There is exchange of goods, services and resources between patron and client. These relationships are not restricted to goods and resources but also involve exchange of promises and obligations. In the present scenario, there is potential for judgmental miscalculations which could get heightened by conflicts. A violent clash between the armies of two respective countries occurred on 15 June 2020 in which 20 Indian soldiers died. This conflict was part of the broader standoff happened along the Galwan River. Other concerns affecting the position of India like emergence of water disputes, China’s unilateralist approach. The unilateral steps taken by China have always been a matter of concern for India. For instance, China’s unilateral step of passing of new military land border law during ongoing military standoff in 2021. In addition, China’s unilateral decision and developments on the rivers is also going to affect the relationship of both countries. Brahma Chellaney, a geostrategist regards China as Hydro hegemon. According to Chellany, the hydro politics of Beijing has created national security implications for India. For instance, China has control over major Indian rivers and its ambitious water plans are a sign for occurrence of conflict between them.

Despite China’s defensive account of its armed forces, it remains a source of insecurity for India. Traditional aspect of security has remained crucial dominating factor in Sino-India relations. At the same time growing asymmetric power equation between both sides has led to the belief of China bidding its own time to grow its might, so that it can favourably negotiate boundary equation from position of strength. This perceived lopsided pattern is going to embolden China. It is argued that connection that developed after Indian Prime minister Rajiv Gandhi official visit to China had been shaken. This visit is regarded as the major event in their association as first time an Indian Prime Minister visited China and both prospered a positive view of peace and stability in both Asian sphere and the world at large. There was improvement in their alliance after the landmark visit of Rajiv Gandhi in 1988.In addition to this, Beijing has also perceived India’s closer ties with United States and its Neighbourhood First policy in South Asia in a negative manner. Misperception and security dilemma has become important framework in their tie-up. A realist assessment of Sino-India relationship encompasses a lot of perspectives dealing with power and security. Realism dictates that India should not bargain with respect to its strategic autonomy. Strategic autonomy mainly deals with the ability of a state to pursue its own national interests and restrain the pressures of other states (or external pressure) to choose its own preferred course of foreign policy.

On the other hand, the understanding of their connections from the framework of Neo-Liberal Institutionalism also becomes important. Neo Liberal Institutionalism regards institutions and set of rules called regimes that develops cooperation among states. It is to be highlighted that this international institution is of fundamental kind such as state sovereignty or balance of power. Institutions act as buffer that absorbs the shocks and promotes the characteristic of cooperation. In Indo-Chinese ties, institutions and structures of global governance play a bridging role in improving the conflictual ties through dialogue and consultation. Institutions can play a significant prospect for building strategic communication where both states can cooperate on areas of common interest. These shared interests include resolving issues of economic engagement, the menace of terrorism, problems of climate change etc. From this aspect, the chances of engagement in Sino-India relations presents hope and can complement in resolving the issues but India needs to include realist strands in its strategic choices for tackling China and its aggressive posture.

Theoretical Framework

India’s transformation as a rising power is taking place in the horizon of China’s growing military and economic influence. The series of territorial incursions since 2013 from Damchok to Doklam reflect Chinese revisionist tendencies. The relations between these two mighty powers represents an asymmetric pattern in the balance of power from the perspective of school of realism, On the other hand, neoliberal Institutionalism highlights that growing trade and economic integration between these two powers reduces the chances of war. Power and Security are two sides of the same coin and helps in analysing interests of the states. Today the focus is laid down on the security of state in both traditional and non-traditional defence sectors. The normative core of realism is national security and state survival: these are the values that drive realist doctrine and realist foreign policy. The concept of security and fear are crucial for understanding the dynamics of international system. Both of them plays an important role in structuring our present. The concept of fear in international politics is mainly used in two ways. Firstly, fear drives the state to increase its military capability to overcome the fear of other state. Secondly, fear also serves as the principal driver of war when the growing power of other state is feared. This understanding of fear is very apt to analyse the relationship between these two Asian giants. Two contending approaches of international politics, Neo-Realism and Neo-Liberalism present two strategies for dealing with such issues, Balance of Power and Collective Security respectively. Each theory attempts to offer better explanation of state behaviour and structure of international system. The concept of power and institutions is very congruent in understanding the Indo- Chinese ties from two alternative angles and their role in the international system.

Power is divided into two types- Hard power and Soft Power. Joseph Nye, famous political scientist has proposed the difference between these powers. Hard power is related to country’s ability to make other country do what it wants by means of force or coercion and primarily through military and economic means. On the other hand, soft power is related to getting things done by persuasion with regard of one’s values, political institutions and cultural exchanges. The concept of power helps to understand China’s growing assertiveness in the Indo-Pacific as well as its wolf warrior Diplomacy in the 21^st century. The power balance is the fundamental issue that is very important to analyse for the understanding of India-China Relations from the theoretical paradigm. Kanti Bajpai, a renowned scholar of international affairs in his book India versus China: Why they are not friends highlights a key element missing in Nye concept of Power i.e., the desire for power and a channeling of social effort towards the attainment of power. Neorealist focuses on security interests whereas Neoliberal Institutionalism highlights about the importance of growing interdependence and economic engagement between the states. According to this latter aspect, Institutions and rules in international system play an effective role in policy making in the contemporary world.

Relevance of India China Relations in the 21^st century from the lens of Realism

Barry Buzan expressed ‘Security is taken to be about the pursuit of freedom from threat and the ability of states and societies to maintain their independent identity and their functional integrity against forces of change which they see as hostile’. Security is a broader term and includes more than just survival and power maximisation as mentioned by John Mearsheimer in his concept of Offensive Realism. In the modern world, the global patterns of security are well understood with the help of Realist conception, which is a timeless theory. But in the contemporary world, other theories of interdependence, regimes and institutional paradigms are also very relevant in getting hold of the current patterns of Security and Power. In the context of understanding of the bilateral ties and patterns of misperceptions and psychological assumptions of two Asian giants- India and China, two mainstream theories of Realism and Neoliberal Institutionalism are relevant in today’s arena. Both the perspectives of classical theorist like Hans Morgenthau and Structural Realist Kenneth Waltz play an important role. The understanding of their ties requires comprehensive analysis from multipronged dimensions because using only one framework will give us limited analytical account.

Sino-Indian Relations can be understood in four phases after both gained independence First phase from 1947-1962, second Sino Indian Border war of 1962 to cold war years, third from end of Cold war 1990 to 2014 and fourth from 2014 when BJP came as a ruling government till present. It is also very important to understand the civilizational links between them. The travellers and ancient scholars like Fa Xian, Xuan Zhang and Kumarajiva had contributions in weaving cross cultural connection links. So, the question is does the account of these thinkers of ancient period has any effect on perceptions both countries hold of each other in the current era of economic globalisation and what is its effect on historical ties of the countries.

The historic war that took place on 20 October 1962 had a tragic impact on the relations between both countries China disregarded the colonial demarcation of Mac Mohan line as it undermined its legitimacy. There have been questions of inconclusiveness of war outcomes among the scholarship¹⁶. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru had an idealistic perception that China will not go to war against India because both countries suffered from same pain bestowed by imperialism on them. Whereas China took a contradictory approach. The “Hindi Chini bhai bhai” idealist conception of Nehru was shattered as China went to war against India in 1962 despite signing of the Panchsheel agreement. This agreement was about the five principles of peaceful coexistence. According to the perspective of Indian scholar Alka Acharya, these principles can be seen as “first joint political contribution of India and China to contemporary foreign policy semantics”. The Chinese account puts blame on the forward policy of India. Forward policy of India mainly sought the raising of military outposts in areas claimed by Chinese government. PM Nehru directed Forward policy to stop further incursions of China that was perceived as threat and culminated in the heart wrenching war of 1962. Rajesh Rajagopalan, an expert on Chinese studies argues forward policy was far from being aggressive, it was defensive in character and had many flaws but threatening China was not one of them.

Kanti Bajpai in his book India and China: Why they can’t be friends analyses the relationship of India China with the aspect of four Ps, Perceptions, Parameters, Partnerships and Power Parity. He gave adherence to their old civilizational links due to trade and Buddhism but adds that presently their relationship is suffering from disdain and misperceptions. These misperceptions have led India to think in terms of strategic loss and advantage. And India is employing a strategy, a mix of both External and Internal Balancing. Internal Balancing involves enhancing military capabilities and technological advancements. As India’s capabilities are defensive in nature; Internal Balancing won’t alone suffice. External Balancing involves strategic partnerships with United States and other Quad Members like Japan and Australia. C Raja Mohan, Indian foreign policy analyst highlights in his article that ‘Internal Balancing, Alliances and Asymmetric Approaches are as old as statecraft; they are not inventions of modern political thought from Europe or America but dates back to the era of Kautilya’s Arthashastra’. These alliances and strategic partnerships will have a larger power dynamic that will involve more players and will have impact on Asian Security and its future. India is also implying incremental balancing with Vietnam and Philippines which are unhappy with China’s aggressive behaviour in South China Sea through military tactics. ²³. In what manner it will serve Asian security in a geopolitical context is a question worth to examine.

According to Sun Tzu, Chinese Military Strategist saying ‘The art of war teaches us to rely not on the likelihood of the enemy’s not coming, but on our own readiness to receive him; not on the chance of his not attacking but rather on the fact that we have made our position unassailable.’ This framework needs to be adopted by India. India needs to guard its positions with the use of both hard power and soft power diplomacy relevant in today’s world. The strategies and approaches need to be redefined and a mix of perspectives is required to bring a fresh insight.

Reconsideration of Indo Chinese Relationship from the perspective of Neoliberal Institutionalism

Making of National Security Policy and ensuring security of states is influenced by political institutions and political ideas espoused by elites and public. A liberal account of Indian- Chinese ties cater to the view that the respective foreign policy of both states is shaped by the political leadership and their diplomatic interactions. The political elites play an effective role in the assessment of threats and provides political ideas to manage these issues. For instance, the agreement of Panchsheel was based on the Nehruvian outlook was a way to improve relations among both nations. In a nutshell, political leaders and their political ideas plays a major role in influencing the foreign policy to a great extent. Like, the Indian foreign policy was first shaped by idealistic approach of Nehru in 1950s to 1960s and then it was conducted according to the realistic approach of Indira Gandhi. The political idea of Nehru was based on an approach that post-colonial India was not equipped enough with resources and power to follow realist doctrine whereas Indira Gandhi, daughter of Pt. Nehru was of contrary approach. The realistic outlook of Indian foreign policy and the testing of nuclear weapons in 1974 were first political ideas espoused by political leadership. Similarly in China, the thought of Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaoping theory, and the political ideas of Xi-Jinping in contemporary era, all have played considerable role in shaping the Chinese foreign policy. Hence, it is apt to consider political elites do play an important role in espousing political ideas and shaping foreign policy in alignment with these ideas.

China has gone through a major transformation in the last decade with the rise and consolidation of power under the leadership of Xi Jinping.  Political and Economic challenges in addition to the military ones are important to be understood. There is a rising economic gap and power asymmetry between India and China because of China’s giant GDP that is four times larger than that of India. Ananth Krishnan, an Indian journalist considers Chinese economic presence in neighbourhood as a pressing challenge and India should provide transparent and financial sustainable alternatives. Factors other than territorial dispute that affects India and China’s bilateral ties are China’s relations with Pakistan²⁹, the flow of Chinese military power into Pakistan and Beijing interference in the region of Kashmir presents a threat to New Delhi’s security and national interests.

As China’s economic capabilities and political impressions grew, its desire of expanding and advancing its economic interests and strategic footprint in South Asia grew simultaneously. The main drivers of Chinese foreign policy are such as stabilising Tibetan and Xinjiang periphery, advancing its footprint in the Indian Ocean to resolve Malacca Dilemma, and countering the influence of US and India in the countries of South Asia Region. Another point to given adherence is that China’s progressive rise. The impact of China has dramatically increased in all regions of the world from an economic point of view. India needs to enhance its capabilities to create both the regional and global footprint at a great level. The main purpose of international institutions and agreements is to provide solutions to interstate problems by playing the role of mediator between them. This view stresses on the cooperative elements among their relationship. During many high-level visits that took place between these two powers have brought a transformative change among their interconnection. For instance, an agreement signed in the year 1993 focused on Maintainence of Peace and Tranquility along the line of actual control (LAC). This agreement signed during Narsimha Rao’s visit to China highlighted the growth of stability in the bilateral relationship of Indo- China. Similarly, during the visit of Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee in 2003 also reflected the improvement in their relations. A Declaration on Principles for Relations and Comprehensive Cooperation was signed and a mutual decision of appointing Special representatives to look into boundary dispute was finalised. The economic engagements between these two Asian giants are shaped through various strategic institutionalised dialogue interactions that take place from time to time. These dialogue interactions have led to the qualitative improvement in their relationship at both Bilateral and multilateral forums and related to the field of trade, commerce, technology etc. The complex web of economic interdependence between both nations also increases chances of increased cooperation and makes war less likely to take place.

Conclusion

India and China are two prime nations in the Asian world that possess considerable power. Their relations range from competitive to conflictual. In today’s world, both China and India are unwilling to compromise with their national interests and provide concessions. India does not want to embolden China and maintain its positions. Hence, India has adopted the view of amalgamation of external and internal balancing. Both have misconceptions with respect to each other. India and China need to indulge into diplomatic interactions to a great extent to develop a prosperous friendship that is also important for Asian Security.