Test for India in a quid pro quo world

MAY we live in interesting times, goes the Chinese proverb. In a fast-moving world, the week gone by threw up some interesting facets in the world around us. In any case, the end of the week is always a good time to take stock of things.

Advertisement

The China-Pakistan bond — “higher than the mountains, deeper than the seas and sweeter than honey,” a phrase that is invoked like a mantra between leaders of both countries when they meet — is fast becoming a reality that is staring India in the face, wherever it turns to look.

Deputy army chief Lt Gen Rahul R Singh’s eloquent remarks about China using the “borrowed knife” approach — meaning that, during Op Sindoor, it aided Pakistan every step of the way to hurt India — is confirmation, if confirmation was needed, that China is India’s foremost adversary.

Two other factors are equally significant. The first, that China’s key adversary, the US, is also warming towards the Pakistanis. The second, that as the Dalai Lama turns 90 this weekend and has, himself, put to rest speculation about his reincarnation — by saying that he will be born outside China, in a free and democratic country, for example like India — it is not clear how the Modi government is viewing this transition-in-the-making.

Let’s take the first, first. It now seems that just before the Quad foreign ministers met in Washington DC earlier this week — and issued a statement that refused to name Pakistan as the sponsor of the Pahalgam attack, although it condemned “cross-border terrorism”, a compromise phrase that indicated it was the farthest it would go — the Pakistan air force chief, Zaheer Ahmed Baber Sidhu, was also warming his heels in the US capital.

Sidhu’s visit comes in the wake of the Pakistan army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir’s trip to the US, where he was feted to an extraordinary meeting with US President Donald Trump. Meanwhile, trade negotiations between India and the US are concluding — the Indian team is back home. If New Delhi gets away without opening up its agricultural basket, it would be a big triumph. It might also be seen by the US as a quid pro quo on expanding ties with Pakistan.

And this is exactly where the cookie is beginning to crumble these days. The US knows that the word “Pakistan” is anathema to the Modi government, but it continues to meet its senior military leadership. Parts of the US are upset that India continues to buy oil from Russia. Meanwhile, Russia has just become the first country in the world to recognise the Taliban, Pakistan’s neighbour and now friend-turned-antagonist, in an effort to gain influence in this part of inner Asia.

At least the Quad statement named “Pahalgam,” even if it didn’t name “Pakistan.” Last week, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh refused to sign the joint statement of the China-led Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) because it named neither the country behind the Pahalgam attack nor the venue of the attack.

The bigger question, or questions, are why the Quad, a powerful grouping in the Indo-Pacific of which India is a key partner, is refusing to fully buy what India is saying. Why are these nations, all of whom recognise that their fellow Quad nation is being hurt by Pakistan-sponsored terror attacks, reluctant to call out Pakistan? Moreover, what can India do to counter this view?

It is clear the Modi government intends to take control of the narrative — which is why it is allowing the Pakistan hockey team to play two tournaments in India over the next few months, the Asia Cup and the Men’s Junior World Cup, even if these are being framed as international and not bilateral tournaments.

Even more interesting is the defence the Punjab BJP has mounted in favour of Diljit Dosanjh and why the honourable and patriotic sardar should not be trolled — and his movie unbanned — because a Pakistani actress has acted in it.

Some days ago, the government tested a balloon by unblocking some social media accounts of key Pakistani influencers like Shoaib Malik, Shahid Afridi and Mawra Hocane — but the social media backlash was so huge that it was forced to block them again.

The interesting thing is that some of the information that underlines India’s success during Op Sindoor is coming from these blocked social media accounts — like Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s key aide Rana Sanaullah telling well-known Pakistani journalist Hamid Mir (whose account is blocked) that Pakistan was under a lot of pressure when India’s BrahMos missiles were honing in towards Nur Khan airbase.

According to Sanaullah, the Pakistani defence forces only had “34 seconds” to decide how to act. If they had responded by firing their own missiles, he said, the tit-for-tat reaction may have led towards an escalatory situation. Clearly, Sanaullah was admitting the nervousness in the Pakistani camp that early morning of May 10 when the IAF basically settled the matter.

Now snatches of this interview are being played out on social media today — but imagine the effect if the full interview was available to all Indians, not just a truncated version of it.

And then there is the Dalai Lama question. Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju, who hails from Arunachal Pradesh, which is where the sixth Dalai Lama was born, in Tawang, as well as where the current, the Fourteenth, set foot when he fled Tibet for India in 1959 — has been fielded these last few days to insist that the Dalai Lama, and no one else, (meaning, China) will decide what happens to the holy institution of Tibetan Buddhism.

The Modi government will more or less go along with what the Tibetans-in-exile want, but all sides know that in the knuckle-hard world of today, where each country will protect its own interest, it is unlikely that New Delhi will go out on a limb to unduly irritate the Chinese. The Chinese, on their part, have warned India to “exercise caution” on this matter before it affects bilateral relations — there’s the not-so-coded threat.

Old-timers remember the one meeting between PM Modi and the Dalai Lama about 10 years ago — a secret meeting to which the Tibetan leader was taken to meet the PM in an unmarked car and darkened windows. Today, New Delhi has put out that it doesn’t take positions on matters of faith, although it upholds freedom of religion. Question is, what does this coded message mean?