Decades ago, Sardar Vallabhbhai closest aide, V.P. Menon caution to India about succumbing to fear of its own shadow comes readily to mind. Shortly before his death, Patel himself was sharply critical of K.M. Panikkar, India’s ambassador to China, for the lack of firmness in his presentation of India’s concern at China’s invasion of Tibet in November 1950, of being more anxious to explain the minatory demarches of Beijing to New Delhi. Certain media gurus and retired diplomat more Panikkan than Gandhian in their eye for the main chance – peace prizes and the plums to follow
Can India ever be in the right for such folk? To ask the question is not to surrender to mindless jingoism. Perish the thought. No sane or civilized adult would wish to descend to such abject juvenilia.
Reading a recent edit-page article in the Kolkata-based Telegraph newspaper by K.P.Nayar, its Diplomatic Correspondent, resident in Washington, warning ‘the Indian political class’ of the perils of baiting mighty China with a ‘two China policy’ and to learn the lesson of US President Donald Trump’s supposed mea culpa when Beijing fired a broadside across his bows.
Time was when fact was sacred and comment was free. Clearly, not any longer; neither in the United States and Britain, nor, alas, in the English-language Indian broadsheets, long habituated to taking their cues from Big Brother in the West.
Examine, for a start, the Trump case. He had had an amicable telephone conversation with the Prime Minister of Taiwan following his election victory over Hilary Clinton. It was the New York Times and its ilk, and the Democratic party establishment and the Obama White House who put the two-China spin to Mr Trump’s conversation. True, Bejing was offended and went into a deep sulk. But this invariably happens when Bejing takes umbrage at any event involving, say, the Dalai Lama, whether it be an invitation to a cultural event at Rashtrapati Bhavan or his movements within India, or even his stay in India itself. In this case the charge is splitting China. A mere whisper to a Taiwanese personage ins an invitation elicit similar bolts of fury.
Beijing’s recent ire against India arose from the visit of a Taiwanese parliamentary delegation to New Delhi at the invitation of a BJP caucus in Parliament. The BJP caucus, has not pleaded for a two-China policy to the Indian government; neither has the ‘Indian political class.’ Mr Nayar is a name-dropper. Names of the great and good in the Ministry of External Affairs are given a generous airing, from time to time. Amidst such enthusiastic trivia – for such it is – he omits even passing reference to China’s stubborn unwillingness to subscribe to the UN Security black list of Pakistani jihadi Masood Azhar as a terrorist for his role in the Mumbai terror assault of November 26, 2008, in which 167 innocent people lost their lives. In addition to this, China has stubbornly blocked India’s admission to the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). It takes two to tango, but it takes a solitary state to kowtow to the dictates of the Middle Kingdom. We may expect a warning of dire consequences should the forthcoming high level ministerial visits from Vietnam to New Delhi lead to closer Indo-Vietnam defence ties. The Nayar, based on illogical negativism would possibly argue for a suspension of the visit for fear of upsetting the Chinese leadership. There are siren calls on the pages of the Hindu newspaper arguing for India to sign up to China’s ‘One Road, One Belt’ project, an ambitious attempt to construct a new economic equator encircling the world.. China’s strategic alignment with its ‘all-weather friend,’ Pakistan, targeting India, must be accepted without denur. The Nayar script is integral to the theatre of the absurd.
Incidentally, Mr Nayar was a special pleader for Hillary Clinton in his reporting of the US Presidential election. He issued heavy hints at the time on the likely negative impact on Indo-US relations were Donald Trump to enter the White House as president. Best wait and see.
