One India vs. One China

【Comment】

By introducing Chinese self-claimed core interest, India, as well as all other countries, realizes its core interest was infringed by Beijing for free. 

India should introduce the same idea against China as diplomatic weapons.

Glad to see the “One India” policy, meaning Kashmir is a core interest of India among others. 

Chinese tend to do things over the limit.  While expelled out Indian business to protect Chinese, Beijing gives India the bargaining chips to against it.

不滿中國挺恐攻首腦！ 印媒：別再對台灣議題過度謹慎    自由20190316

中國4度阻撓將穆罕默德軍（JeM）首腦阿茲哈（Masood Azhar）列入聯合國全球恐怖分子黑名單，引發印度輿論強烈不滿。印度主流報紙刊登社論批評北京政府，呼籲中國如果不尊重印度，那印度可以不要再過度謹慎地對待台灣、西藏和新疆等敏感議題。

印度主流媒體《印度時報》（Times of India）15日社論以「阿茲哈效應」（Masood Azhar effect）為題指出，中國有野心成為卓越的地緣政治大國，必須對全球共同利益做出重大貢獻，像是處理恐怖主義與強化區域安全，但中國作為巴基斯坦戰略贊助人的角色，中國做不到上述2點。

文中指出，北京與新德里打交道時遵循了一個奇怪的雙重標準，北京希望新德里以極其尊重的態度對待它所定義的核心利益，但中國卻同時扼殺了印度的核心利益。新德里可以不再過分謹慎對待台灣、西藏和新疆的敏感問題，除非中國尊重印度的「一個印度」（one-India）政策，印度才會尊重中國的「一個中國」原則。

社論提到，印度企業已經被排擠出中國，產生了630億美元的巨額貿易逆差，因此有足夠的空間來擠壓中國企業，不必擔心中國報復。印度傳統上對中國採取恭敬的政策，現在是時候擺脫這個自我強加的禁忌了。

Masood Azhar effect: After India’s reset with Pakistan it is time for a reset with China    Times of India 20190315

China has ambitions of becoming the pre-eminent geopolitical power.  Such a role calls for big contributions to global common goods, such as taking on terrorism and enhancing regional security.  But in its role as Pakistan’s strategic patron, China fails miserably at this task.  Far from reining in the Pakistan mosque-mujahideen-military complex there’s a Red Wall of protection going up around it. At the UN China has now blocked a proposal to ban Jaish-e-Muhammed chief Masood Azhar for the fourth time.  This is an abhorrent response to the deadliest terror attack on Indian security forces in Kashmir, for which JeM claimed responsibility.

In responding to the Pulwama attack with an air strike against the JeM terror training camp at Balakot, India broke free of its self-imposed shackles in the proxy war that Pakistan has been waging against it for decades.  But China’s actions at the UNSC – having Pakistan’s back even when it’s being pressed by most world capitals to roll up its state sponsorship of terrorism – reveal it to be the elephant in the room that New Delhi must now wake up to.

Beijing follows a curious double standard in dealing with New Delhi – while it expects the latter to treat its red lines on what it defines as its core interests with great deference, it also stomps all over India’s core interests.  It appears more apprehensive about how JeM may react to any ban placed on its leader, than to how New Delhi may respond to being consistently spurned.  It is this calculus that New Delhi must seek to change if the NDA government’s claims of ushering in a ‘new India’, that has snapped out of its perennially defensive approach, have any substance.

Thus, New Delhi can stop being overly cautious about China’s sensitivities from Taiwan and Tibet to Xinjiang.  India should respect a one-China policy to the extent China respects a one-India policy.  China makes light of the plentiful evidence against the JeM chief, India should highlight extensively documented human rights abuses against Uighurs.  There is plenty of scope to squeeze Chinese business – without fear of retaliation since Indian business has already been squeezed out of China, yielding a yawning trade deficit of $63 billion (this figure has gone up by about 75% on NDA’s watch).  It is now time to break out of another self-imposed taboo: India’s traditionally deferential policy towards China.