Matching China through self-reliance tough

Ex-Special Secretary, Cabinet Secretariat

On August 6, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar published an essay ‘India and the emerging world’ in a national daily. Despite the title which seemed more on India’s future diplomatic trajectory, the emphasis was on the global impact of China’s rise. “But for two decades, China had been winning without fighting, while the US was fighting without winning.” Jaishankar foresees that a strongly bipolar world is not likely to emerge even if the China-West ties take a more adversarial character. While the US ‘may have weakened, China’s rise is still far from maturing.’ As the world is moving towards greater ‘plurilateralism’, ‘India must address this challenge of forging more contemporary ties on every major account.’

It would have been beneficial had Jaishankar also spelt out clearly his government’s strategy to tackle China which is sitting on our land. That is the prime focus of our country. Also, in his Fourth Ramnath Goenka Lecture on November 14, 2019, he had claimed that India had succeeded in foreign policy goals when it took unilateral steps: “The lack of response to 26/11 is so different from the Uri and Balakot operations.” However, he seems to contradict this with this sentence in his essay: “A more nationalistic approach to international relations will undeniably weaken multilateral rules in many domains.” Is he revising his stand on a nationalist oriented foreign policy?

Would our steps in May 2020 be in tandem with America like recommending Taiwan’s participation in the World Health Assembly or our BJP MPs congratulating President Tsai Ing-wen’s inauguration? Should they be counted as ‘steps to forge contemporary ties to enhance our standing?’ In this, we seem to be following US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo who had congratulated President Tsai Ing-wen on May 20. Pompeo also said on August 6 that he had spoken to ‘Foreign Minister Jaishankar a number of times’ on resisting China. Some sections in the Indian media have been articulating closer ties with Taiwan and a more active role in the South China Sea disputes, apart from the ‘Quad’ as a counterpoise to Beijing.

Unfortunately, only India seems to be following Pompeo’s policy which has only managed to irritate China rather than causing any damage. It is significant that ASEAN countries, which are directly affected by China’s South China Sea policy, have shown disinterest in confronting China. An example is the statement by the Philippines President Duterte on July 27. Even Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne had echoed Duterte’s opinion earlier on July 23 on the ground that they have ‘strong engagement’ with China.

Who is responsible for China’s rise? History records that Taiwan and America were primarily responsible by transferring production lines to China on cost considerations since 1979. This was after Deng Xiaoping’s ‘charm offensive’ to the West after discarding the Maoist command economy by decentralising and diversifying development into four coastal economic zones with free market reforms and tariff reduction.

As a result, Western countries gathered an impression that Deng was moving away from the ideology-oriented secretive communist model into a more open, institution-driven decision-making system. Echoing this, the US National Intelligence Council (NIC) meeting on September 29, 1999, recommended that the ‘WTO membership for China is strongly in our interest.’ Thus, China became a WTO member in December 2001.

None in the West understood what Deng had in mind. As French journalist Roger Faligot had recorded, none knew that Deng was an old intelligence operative in Europe in the 1920s under Zhou Enlai for covert technology adaptation. In January 1979, Deng took Ling Yun, his new spy chief, during his successful visit to the US. During that time, Chinese intelligence (Guoanbu’s 12th Bureau) started liaison with the CIA and others in Europe.

Unknown to them, Guoanbu’s 10th Bureau was simultaneously charged with economic and technical espionage through the Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation (MOFTEC), which was liaising with foreign investors. From then on, Chinese intelligence was closely associated with all strategic schemes as planner, facilitator and implementer. In fact, China is the only country which became a superpower through intelligence.

In May 1979, US President Jimmy Carter sent CIA Director Stansfield Turner to meet Deng to set up telemetry stations at Qitai and Korla (Xinjiang) for monitoring Soviet nuclear and missile tests. Deng agreed on the condition that only the Chinese would do its installation with Western training in December 1979. These facilities, along with others, became the nucleus of the present colossal Chinese capability for cyber warfare.

The 1989 Tiananmen riots divided American policy analysts into ‘Engagers’ like Henry Kissinger or ‘Containers’ like George Will. Some like Jacob Heilbrunn felt that China would implode. However, unseen by all of them, total China-US trade jumped from $5 billion in 1980 to $660 billion in 2018.

The total volume of Taiwan-China trade is not known officially. Since 2002, China has accounted for more than two-third of Taiwan’s approved annual outbound FDI. In early 2003, Taiwan’s Central Bank reported $67 billion invested in China. According to Peterson Institute for International Economics, this should have been $130-150 billion by 2008.

Wall Street Journal (August 7) revealed a security dimension in China’s control over essential pharmaceutical production. It quoted a March 2020 Xinhua op-ed piece by Huang Sheng, described as a nationalist book author, that China could use strategic weapons on export of medical products to America if the latter persisted with sanctions. The paper also quotes Christopher Priest, Deputy Assistant Director at the US Defence Health Agency’s Operations Directorate that national security risks of Chinese dominance cannot be overstated.

Although officially denied, it is of concern that 80% of global supply of crucial pharmaceutical ingredients like the blood anti-coagulant Heparin, is made in China. China makes 70% of Acetaminophen used in America. The report particularly mentions India depending on China for 80% of its supply of active pharmaceutical ingredients (API). ‘Overall, China makes half of the planet’s API, according to Britain’s Medicine and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency and Pharmaceutical Analysts.’ How long will India take to produce these through Atmanirbharta?