This past week Henry Kissinger provided advice to the US on relations with China. But what would Kissinger advise on India-China relations? Of course there is little love lost between India and Henry Kissinger. He stood behind Pakistan’s atrocities in Bangladesh and against India’s drive for democracy. The US Ambassador, Blood, was recalled for pointing this out. The NSA advised the US to send an aircraft carrier to threaten India over E Pakistan, but the USSR neutralised the American threat.
Kissinger’s actions made the world more and more bipolar. India would be closer and closer to USSR and US would be Pakistan’s funder in general and hand-maiden. It was Kissinger who wrongly assessed that Indira Gandhi ‘suckered’ the Americans, but all the while it was Pakistan which for decades sucker the Americans which their subsequent NSAs and Presidents would admit.
So what would the old man advise now on India and China relations all these years later? Given his pretty poor track record, you may not bother reading on.
Drawing upon the diplomatic strategies of Henry Kissinger, it is likely that he would first acknowledge the deep-seated historical tensions and territorial disputes that underpin the relationship between India and China. The two nations have clashed over their Himalayan border for decades, notably in the 1962 Sino-Indian War, and tensions have periodically flared up since then.
Kissinger, who is known for his realist approach to international relations, would likely identify the strategic considerations for both India and China. For India, balancing China's growing economic and military power in the region is a major strategic priority. India also seeks to protect its territorial integrity and sovereignty, especially in disputed areas like Arunachal Pradesh and Aksai Chin.
For China, its strategic interests lie in consolidating its regional influence, maintaining stability along its western border, and ensuring that India does not become a counterweight to its power in the region by aligning too closely with other major powers like the United States or Japan.
Kissinger might then turn to the economic interdependencies between the two countries. China is India's 2nd largest trading partner, and there is considerable potential for deeper economic integration. Given Kissinger's instrumental role in normalizing U.S.-China relations through "ping-pong diplomacy," he might suggest similar cultural exchanges and people-to-people contacts between India and China as a way of easing tensions and fostering mutual understanding.
He would also likely advocate for increased engagement in regional multilateral organizations. Both India and China are members of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. Active participation in such forums provides opportunities for dialogue, builds trust, and can help manage disputes.
Kissinger's policy of détente, which aimed at easing geopolitical tensions during the Cold War, might inform his advice on how to deal with the military and security concerns between India and China. He could suggest confidence-building measures, such as maintaining regular communication between military commanders, establishing protocols to prevent border skirmishes, and seeking ways to limit the arms race in the region.
Lastly, Kissinger's strategy of "triangular diplomacy" might come into play. He might advise both countries to leverage their relationships with other major powers to create a balance that discourages aggression. For instance, India could strengthen its partnerships with the U.S. and Japan, while China could do the same with Russia and Pakistan.
In conclusion, the Kissinger-esque approach to improving India-China relations would likely involve a delicate balancing act: recognizing and managing strategic competition, harnessing economic interdependencies, promoting cultural exchanges, enhancing multilateral engagement, implementing confidence-building measures, and strategically using relationships with other major powers. It's a complex and challenging task, but one that is essential for regional and global stability.
The bottom line is, India’s current Foreign Secretary is far more masterful than Kissinger at doing all this and more.
