www.icec-council.org
Vol 1, Issue 4, July-August 2011 Editor-in-Chief Mohammed Saqib Editor Prashun Bhaumik Editorial Board Abid Hussain Mani Shankar Aiyar P.S. Deodhar Dilip Cherian Amir Ullah Khan Parama Sinha Palit Chen Si (China) Editorial Team Anchit Goel Irfan Alam Manju Hara Harshie Wahie Sumelika Bhattacharyya Design Manoj Raikwar Printed and Published by India China Economic and Cultural Council K-19 (GF), South Extension-II New Delhi- 110049 address for all correspondence India China Economic and Cultural Council K-19 (GF), South Extension-II New Delhi- 110049 Telefax: 011-46550348 Printed AT Anne Print Solutions B-32, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi-110020 Tel. 011-40525878, 011-65690940 Email: info@anneprintsolutions.com All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without written permission is prohibited.
All advertising enquiries, comments and feedback are welcome at icec@icec-council.org The information contained in this magazine has been reviewed for accuracy and is deemed reliable but is not necessarily complete or guaranteed by the Editor. The views expressed in this digest are solely that of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the views of the magazine.
Importance of Truth It was the winter of 1986. The hills of Darjeeling were on fire. A littleknown former school teacher’s rant had turned into a revolution. Subash Ghising had been for long talking about a homeland for those he called the Gorkhas – different from Nepalis – the original inhabitants of the land, and hence his demand for a Gorkhaland. For years nobody paid him much attention but suddenly he seemed to have caught the collective imagination. And soon the beautiful hills of Darjeeling wore a different look. Deserted! No tourists flocking the Mall which at times made it look like an extension of Calcutta. I was quite happy to have Darjeeling all to myself – having paradropped there as a cub reporter with little experience much to the envy of my senior colleagues at The Telegraph. The lack of tourists was amply made up by thousands of para-military men who joined forces with the local police to nip the agitation. The Rabindra Bhavan opposite the Raj Bhavan no longer had space for cultural evenings; it had turned into a garrisson – the top cop from Calcutta leading the charge having decided to make it his HQ and the control room for the operations in the hills. The violence escalated over the next two years and would claim more than a thousand lives. As I took my tentative bus ride up the hills on that cold January evening, I was not sure of what was in store for me. A scruffy old Nepali sitting next to me struck up a conversation just as we were turning into Ghoom, the highest point before the road dips and curls into the main bazaar of Darjeeling and onto the bus stand. Before he got off at the Darjeeling Taxi Union office, he casually asked me if I would like to meet Ghising. Trying not to jump off my seat I managed a yes. His cryptic reply, “meet me here in two hours.” That evening I met the GNLF leader at transporter Lakpa Dong’s home. The next day The Telegraph ran with the front page super lead of Ghising’s interview calling for an armed struggle. Over the next months I was busy trudging the hills up and down on foot to cover every incident that I heard of, while my senior counterparts from other newspapers and wire agencies faithfully reported what the police control room doled out (on phone). Least to say the administration was not happy with me. One morning when I walked into Rabindra Bhavan as part of my usual rounds, District Magistrate Patra welcomed me as he sat sipping tea next to a fire on the sprawling gardens of the now police control room. The welcome soon turned to threat – it came straight like an arrow – tell us all you know about Ghising and his organization (structure, leadership etc) or we (the state) don’t talk to you anymore. As Patra put it quite simply, “We have seen so many journalists come and go. You’re only a kid.” I left Rabindra Bhavan that day never to return. Soon I was labelled a GNLF sympathiser. Surely the irony was not lost when a few months later Ghising ordered that I leave the hills. His displeasure – over breakfast at his modest home in Jalapahar he scoffed at all those “Nepalis who still hang pictures of their king at home” and said “those who had come to Darjeeling post 1964 should be sent home.” What a bombshell! This self-proclaimed leader had unwittingly targeted his main constituency. I duly filed the story. Ghising duly denied it. It was conveyed to me that I was not wanted in the hills any longer. Soon I felt the heat, when covering a funeral procession I was suddenly surrounded by young boys with khukris drawn. But another group came to my rescue. It was an important lesson I learnt early on in my journalistic career – that journalism is not only about being balanced. It is about the truth.
A Morning Brush with India
F
or curious passers-by, it was something special happening. The people looked like “Yindu-ren,” they were wearing perhaps their traditional clothes and had a couple of microphones in front of them. As a Chinese father explained to his daughter beside me, looking at the statue behind the Indian gathering, “This is Tagore, the great Indian poet and those people are all Indians.” Tagore’s relationship with China is common knowledge by now. Today, most educated Chinese know about Tagore and have read his poems. The vast range of Tagore’s works is being
translated from Bengali to Chinese by eight professors from Beijing. Therefore, the short cultural performance that the Indian Consulate in Shanghai had organized in front of the Tagore bust on Mao ming Road to commemorate his 150th birth anniversary served to give the common Chinese people a glimpse of Tagore’s works. For the very same occasion, thirty students have also come from Tagore International School in New Delhi to perform a dance based on Tagore’s Bhanusingher Padavali along with students of Jinyuan School, Shanghai. In fact I had the good fortune of seeing the Chinese students dance to a Tagore song while on a trip to their school to teach them the details of the dance (the dance had been choreographed and taught to them through video conferencing by teachers of Tagore International School). It was amazing to see the Chinese girls, who danced almost perfectly and would have passed of as Indian if not for the jump-suit school uniforms that they were wearing. It seems that the Indian and Chinese are definitely bridging the gap, in their own small ways. It is done sometimes by singing on a busy street – a rare occurrence on Chinese streets, trademarked only by the fact that there were as many policemen as there were singers – and sometimes by dancing together in immense enjoyment. From these examples it seems that it is best when done through the joint efforts of the government and the common people. The choice is ours – whether to try and bridge the gap in sixty years or do it in sixteen minutes.
Sumelika Bhattacharyya Chronicle Bureau, Shanghai
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |64|
F I L M R E V I E W
Farewell My Concubine Directed by : Chen Kaige
F
arewell My Concubine literally meaning “The Hegemon-King Bids Farewell to His Concubine” is a 1993 Chinese film directed by Chen Kaige. It is one of the central works of the Fifth Generation movement that brought Chinese film directors to world attention. Similar to other Fifth Generation films like To Live and The Blue Kite, Farewell My Concubine explores the effect of China’s political turmoil during the mid-20th century on the lives of individuals, families, and groups, in this case, two stars in a Peking opera troupe and the woman who comes between them. The film is an adaptation of the novel by Lilian Lee. Lilian Lee is also one of the film’s screenplay writers. Farewell My Concubineremains to date the only Chinese-language film to win the Cannes Palme d’Or. Running through the film is the Beijing opera also known as Farewell My Concubine. The opera becomes Dieyi and Xiaolou’s staple act and scenes from it are performed throughout the film. The events in the film parallel the play. The opera focuses on the loyalty of the concubine Consort Yu (aka Yuji) to Xiang Yu, Hegemon-King of Western Chu, after Xiang’s defeat by Liu Bang, founder of the Han Dynasty. The transition to Han Dynasty rule parallels the transition to the People’s Republic of China. The concubine’s fatal devotion to her doomed king is echoed by Dieyi’s devotion to Xiaolou. At one point in the film, Xiaolou snaps to Dieyi, “I’m just an actor playing a king. You really are Yuji.” Farewell My Concubine spans fifty-three years, presenting the lives of two men against the historical backdrop of a country in upheaval. Initially banned in China but shown to international acclaim, Chen Kaige’s film is one of the true masterpieces. Deserving of its award at Cannes and of its prominent position in 1993’s New York Film Festival, Farewell My Concubine is a motion picture experience that few will soon forget after leaving the theater. In 1924 Beijing, the youthful Douzi and Shitou are brought together under the thumb of the strict master of a small acting troupe. It quickly becomes apparent that these are the most talented of the master’s pupils, and he pushes |62| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
them harder than his other students. Thirteen years later, their suffering has paid off. Douzi, now going by the name of Chen Dieyi (Leslie Cheung), and Shitou, called Duan Xiaolou (Zhang Fengyi), are major opera stars, and their production, “Farewell My Concubine” is nationally known. The two are inseparable, until the woman Juxian (Gong Li) comes between them. Farewell My Concubine is neatly divided into eight chapters, including a 1977 prologue and epilogue that bookend the story. Each section represents a different era in Chinese history and the lives of the characters. The historical background from the time of the Warlords through the Cultural Revolution, including the Japanese invasion of 1937 and the Communist takeover, is integral to the plot. The first portion of the film is devoted to the early lives of Dieyi and Xiaolou as they form an unshakable bond under the often-cruel punishments of their master. Years later, when we meet them again as well-known actors, the bond has only strengthened. These two are as close as men can be - yet Dieyi wishes for even greater intimacy. The subject of homosexuality is only once overtly referred to, but its presence is never far from the surface. While Xiaolou remains blissfully unaware of the nature of his friend’s love, Dieyi is tortured by it. The introduction of Juxian, a prostitute who becomes Xiaolou’s companion, creates a moral dilemma for Dieyi that he is unable to fully resolve. Chen Kaige has done a fabulous job portraying these various relationships with depth, sensitivity, and realism. This is a real and powerful illustration of human interaction that depicts layers of hatred and love. Dieyi is the most fascinating character. From the beginning, his sense of identity is confused. Not only is he attracted to men, but his role as a woman in “Farewell My Concubine” creates certain ambivalence about his own gender. In childhood, the refrain of “I am a girl” is drilled into him so that he can effectively assume the role of the concubine in the opera but, as another character observes, the line between reality and acting has become blurred. Dieyi has a prostitute for a mother, is raped by an old man, and has his best friend stolen from him by a woman. It’s no wonder that his soul is so tortured. Xiaolou has a more straightforward personality, at least on the surface. Nevertheless, through his ever-changing relationships with Dieyi and Juxian, he proves that this apparent simplicity often hides strong undercurrents. One of his actions ultimately propels the movie to its literal and emotional climax. Juxian appears to be little more than a scheming whore frantic to capture a wealthy husband but, like everyone else, she is capable of a few surprises, including an entirelyunexpected streak of kindness towards Dieyi, who shows her nothing but contempt. Starting out as a wedge between the two friends, Juxian ends up a crucial element in their relationship. The only member of the cast likely to be known to (some) viewers is Gong Li, whose credits include Raise the Red Lantern and The Story of Qui Ju. She is, as usual,
excellent, but no more so than her two co-stars, both of whom effectively realize difficult and complex personalities. For the supporting actors, there’s not a weak performance to be found. It’s no wonder that this film was initially banned in China (although the government eventually relented and there was one showing; more may be forthcoming). The Communist movement is not shown in a positive light. While not specifically a force for evil, Communist attitudes contribute to one of the movie’s most emotionally-shocking scenes. Those unfamiliar with twentieth-century Chinese history are in for a crash course. No film can ever hope to convey the complex mosaic of cultural upheaval caused by everything that happened between 1924 and 1977, but Farewell My Concubine does an excellent job presenting samples of the flavour while telling a story that is both epic and intimate. July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |63|
Shows
Exhibitions&Trade S. No.
Exhibition
Date
Venue
In India • In China
Products/Sectors Covered
1
Build India
04 to 6 June
Surat International Exhibition & Convention Centre Surat, Gujarat
Infrastructural Industry
2
5th InterMachinery India
09 to 11 June
Bombay Exhibition Centre(BEC), Mumbai, Maharashtra
Machinery & Equipment Sector
3
Automotive Engineering Show
10 to 12 June
Chennai Trade & Convention Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu
Automotive Manufacturing
4
Global Summit on Green Revolution II
15th June
Hotel Taj Deccan Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh
Agriculture & Greenery Sector
5
Metal Buildings & Steel Structures Expo
23 to 25 June
Pragati Maidan New Delhi, Delhi
Steel Structures & Allied Products
6
Auto World Expo
23 to 26 June
Chennai Trade & Convention Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu
Auto Component manufacturers, OEMs, accessory manufacturers, services, garage equipment, testing equipment and automotive aftermarket
7
PackPlus South
01 to 4 July
Hyderabad International Trade Exposition Centre(HITEX) Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh
Packaging, processing and supply chain
8
Meditec Clinika
02 to 4 July
Palace Grounds Bengaluru, Karnataka
Medical Equipment and technology industry
9
India ICT Summit & Expo
08 July
Mumbai Hotel InterContinental The Grand, Mumbai, Maharashtra
Information & Communication Technology sector
10
India International Garment Fair
12 to 14 July
Pragati Maidan New Delhi, Delhi
Fashion & Apparel Industry
11
ACCESS - Machine Tools & Engineering Expo
14 to 17 July
Chennai Trade & Convention Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu
Machine Tools & Engineering
12
The Manufacturing Expo
28 to 29 July
Mumbai World Trade Centre Mumbai, Maharashtra
Manufacturing Industry
|60| India-China Chronicle  July-August 2011
S. No.
Exhibition
Date
Venue
Products/Sectors Covered
1
7th China International Automotive Electronics & Testing Technology Show & Summit (AES 2011)
01 to 03 June
Shanghai Automobile Exhibition Centre, Shanghai
Interactive forum for policy makers, manufacturers, technology providers, funding agencies, scientists, innovators, engineers and industrialists from all over the world.
2
Aquatech China
01 to 03 June
Shanghai International Convention Center(SICEC), Shanghai
All sectors of the process, drinking and waste water industries
3
China International Consumer Goods Fair
06 to 09 June
Ningbo International Conference Exhibition Center, Ningbo, Zhejiang
Consumer Goods
4
Guangzhou International Lighting Exhibition
09 to 12 June
China Import & Export Fair Pazhou Complex Guangzhou, Guangdong
Decorative lighting, electric lights, LED technology, technical lighting, accessories and electronic components etc
5
China Furniture and Woodworking Machinery (Dalian) Exhibition
09 to 12 June
Dalian Star-Sea Convention & Exhibition Center, Dalian, Liaoning
Furniture and wood products manufacturing industry
6
China Food Machinery & Packaging Exhibition
16 to 18 June
China Import & Export Fair Pazhou Complex, Guangzhou, Guangdong
Packaging and food machinery industry
7
China International Auto Aftermarket Fair & China Auto Accessories Trade Fair
26 June to 2 July
Zhengzhou International Convention & Exhibition Center, Zhengzhou, Henan
Auto accessories and components
8
China International Consumer Electronics Show
07 to 10 July
Qingdao International Convention & Exhibition Center, Qingdao, Shandong
Consumer electronics
9
13th China Building & Decoration Fair
08 to 12 July
China Import & Export Fair Pazhou Complex, Guangzhou
Building and decoration industry
10
ProPak China
13 to 15 July
Shanghai New International Expo Centre (SNIEC), Shanghai
Processing, packaging and end-line printing industry
11
9th Mobilexpo China
20 to 22 July
Shanghai New International Expo Centre(SNIEC), Shanghai
International Mobile Phone Industry
July-August 2011  India-China Chronicle |61|
Time to Rejoice
A few glimpses from the Chinese Spring Festival organized by the ICEC in which both Chinese and Indians participated to mark 2011 as the Year of China-India Exchange.
Chinese Spring Festival 2011 Ms. Li Jian Jian (Uma Li), performing Odissi dance at the festival
Dr. Abid Hussain, Chairman, ICEC, chatting with guests at the Chinese Spring festival
Mr. Ai Ping (Vice Minister, Foreign Affairs, The Communist Party of China), addressing the guests
Mohammed Saqib (Secretary General, ICEC) with Mr. Huang Zhigang (First Secretary (Education), Embassy of China in India)
HE Mr. Zhang Yan (China’s Ambassador to India), addressing the audience at the festival
Ms. Xin Ru (Chinese student from Delhi University), completes a painting in just two minutes
Mr. Peng Gang (Commercial Counselor, Embassy of China), singing a Chinese song
Indian and Chinese students of Kendriya Hindi Sansthan, Delhi University & JNU belting out a Hindi song
Yogi Vipul Bhatti kept the audience enthralled by his mesmerizing performance of amazing Yoga asanas
The audience enjoying the performances.
|58| India-China Chronicle  July-August 2011
Trade Talks
The India-China Economic Conference is an annual event organized alternatively in India and China by the India China Economic and Cultural Council (ICEC).
THE CONFERENCE Mr. Mani Shankar Aiyar (Member of Parliament) addressing the audience at the conference.
Dr. P.D. Kaushik, Associate Director, Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Contemporary Studies
Dr. Rajiv Kumar, Secretary General, FICCI
Prof. Han Hanjun, Research Fellow, Institute of Economics, Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences
Mr. Gautam Bambawale, Joint Secretary (East Asia), Ministry of External Affairs
Dr. Sreemati Chakrabarti, Director, Institute of Chinese Studies
Prof. Ashok Ranchhod, Director, Mudra Institute of Communications, Ahmedabad)
Mr. Wu Rong, CFO, ZTE Telecom India Pvt. Ltd.
Dr. Abid Hussain, Chairman, ICEC
Mr. Wei Min Yao, Vice President, Huawei Telecommunications India Pvt. Ltd. July-August 2011  India-China Chronicle |59|
INFOCUS | CHINA-INDIA IT SECTOR | REPORT
Tianchi Lake
Excuse me while
I kiss the sky At this heavenly lake, white clouds drift while the mountains reach the blue sky. |56| India-China Chronicle  July-August 2011
L
ake Tianchi (Heavenly Lake) is nestled high in the Tianshan Mountains, 115 kilometers (71 miles) west of Urumqi in Xinjiang, China. The area is one of the few unspoiled places in China. The crystal water reflects the snow-topped peaks, fluffy white clouds, and blue sky. This combined with the lush spruce forest covered shores create a truly breathtaking view. To the east of the lake stands the Bogda Peak – the highest peak in the eastern part of the Tian Shan Mountain, which is capped by snow. It is an alpine drift lake shaped in the Quaternary Glacier period. In a clear day, the snow-capped Bogda Peak glistens in the sun and finely contrasts with blue lake water to form fabulous scenery. Together with the steep forested hills and high meadows around, a full picture of heavenly beauty is presented before your eyes. The snow-capped Bogda Peak is the highest in the area and towers over the eastern portion of the lake. This was originally formed by an alpine drift taking place during the Quaternary Glacier period (covering the past two million years). On a clear day, the snow-capped Bogda Peak glistens in the sun and forms a vivid contrast with the blue water below. Add in the steep forested hills and high meadows and it makes a paradise on earth. A local legend says that the Heavenly Empress would hold a gala at this lake whenever a local peach tree bore fruit. As this only happened about
once every 3000 years, the banquets were understandably grand affairs. All the mortals would gather for such a long-awaited occasion, making the lake area into something of a Little Heaven, hence the name, Heavenly Lake (Tianchi). The ride to Tianchi Lake is only a three-hour drive from Urumqi. It passes a giant wind-farm, wide rivers, and mountain pastures. From the chair lift ride up to the lake you can see a number of camps lining the valley below. The
lake itself is also a favorite hiking and camping area. Many other entertaining options are available such as strolling around the lake, riding electric carts, or taking a boat ride. But the best aspect is definitely the marvelous beauty of the entire area and the abundant places for gorgeous photo opportunities. As if the natural beauty of Heavenly Lake were not enough, legend adds a mysterious touch. It is said that the West Queen (Xi Wang Mu) entertained King Mu of the Western Zhou Dynasty (1100B.C.-771B.C.) at the Lake. The West Queen fell in love with the king and asked him in her poem, ‘The white clouds drift while the mountains reach the blue sky. Passing thousands of mountains, crossing ten thousands of rivers, you come to us from a faraway place. If you are still strong and fine, would you like to come back to us again?’ The king answered in his poem, ‘After I go back to central China and lead the people to a prosperous life, I will come to you again.’ We do not know why the king never returned. Only the placid lake and the silent mountains witnessed the lovesickness of the West Queen. India-China Chronicle |57|
LEGACY OF TAGORE, KOTNIS
Groundswell of goodwill Besides Buddhism, two towering figures have epitomized and carried forward India-China friendship and amity to great heights. Rup Narayan Das
I
n the narrative of Sino-Indian civilizational linkage, the cultural and philosophical bonding occupies a very important position. From time immemorial, trade and commercial intercourse between India and China which are well researched and documented, between land and sea, embraced ideas as well as merchandise. As is well-known, there was a regular stream of Buddhist missionaries from India to China, beginning in 65 AD with Kashyapa Matanga, who was followed by such scholars as Kumarajiva,
Dharma Kshama, and Paramartha. If Chinese scholars gravitated towards India, as also India attracted a number of Chinese scholars, who left behind their indelible imprint on India. Of these, the best known are Fa Hien and Hiuan-Tsang, whose records of travels form an important source material of India’s social and political history. The imprint and impact of Buddhism on Chinese sculptures and artifacts were eloquently showcased in February this year when the National Museum of India organized a tapestry of Chinese sculptures in New Delhi. One of the connoisseur’s delights at
the exhibition was a sculpture of the sleeping Buddha. It is heartening that the civilizational and cultural linkage between the two nations and their people have been assiduously carried forward in modern times. A resounding statement of India’s support and solidarity was evident even prior to India’s independence. The two countries, their leaders and their people found themselves in the same pages of History in the protracted fight against imperialism and colonialism. The first joint action plays against imperialism was by India and China, when their representatives signed and made a ‘joint-declaration’ at the International Congress against imperialism, and for national independence, held in Brussels in February, 1927. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru represented the Indian National Congress at the Brussels National Congress where thirteen delegates from India were present. Besides Buddhism, which is a perennial source of bonding between India and China, two towering figures have epitomized and carried forward India-China friendship and amity to greater heights. One is Dr. Dwarknath Kotnis, the legendary doctor who served in China during a very critical juncture of its national life in the late 1930s and died there leaving behind an indelible imprint. Nobel Laureate Rabindranath Tagore, whose 150th birth anniversary is being celebrated this year, was yet another iconic figure who continues to nourish and nurture relationship between the two countries and their people. Tagore is also rated by the leading Chinese daily People’s Daily as one of the fifty important personalities who have influenced modern Chinese thinking. The enigma of China had fascinated the cosmic vision of Tagore defying time and space. Tagore’s engagement with China coincided at a time when both India and China were passing through a churning process in the history of the two countries. Those were the times when China was passing through a firmament. In the historic 1911 Revolution, the nationalist party KMT under the leadership of Dr. Sun Yat-sen came to power ending feudalism and imperialism. In India the situation was
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |53|
INFOCUS | INDIA-CHINA | CULTURE
not very different. It was a coincidence that the year republicanism came into being in China, in India the capital was transferred from Calcutta to Delhi signaling the consolidation of colonialism and correspondingly the clamour for freedom gained momentum in the country. There was a new awakening in both India and China. The idea of nationalism, freedom and liberty had stirred the hearts and minds of the people of the two countries separately and independently. The two countries were passing through a cataclysm. In China an old and archaic order gave way to republicanism and in India resurgent nationalism was brewing in the length and breadth of the country. It was against this backdrop that Tagore was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature bringing great laurel to Asia. As soon as Tagore was catapulated to international fame immediately after winning the Nobel Prize, he received accolade and recognition in China as well. According to Liu Jian, an acknowledged Chinese scholar on Tagore, the first Chinese article to introduce Tagore’s philosophy was Qian Zhixu’s ‘Tagore’s outlook on life” which appeared in a leading Chinese journal in the same year. However, Chen Duxiu, a renowned Professor at Peking (Beijing) University, wrote Liu Jian, was the first person in China who translated Tagore’s poetry and introduced the Nobel Laureate to the Chinese readers. He translated some of Tagore’s famous poems including ‘where the mind is without fear’ into Chinese. He also wrote a bioprofile of Tagore. It was in this context that when Tagore’s works were available in Chinese what provided instant resonance and salience to Tagore’s ideas of nationalism and patriotism in China was the historic May Fourth Movement of 1919, which was a momentous event in China. It was an avant-garde movement. It was against this backdrop that Tagore received an invitation to visit China from Professor Liang Qichao, a distinguished scholar sometime in early 1923. Although Tagore felt immensely happy at the invitation, he gave a serious thought to it and finally
made up his mind to accept the invitation. Other members of Tagore’s high profile team included the renowned scholar of Indology Khitimohan Sen who later wrote an excellent account of Tagore’s China visit, the famous artist Nandalel Bose, L.K. Elmhirst, Director of Sriniketan and Dr. Kalidas Nag from Calcutta University. The high profile team left Calcutta on March 21, 1924 and reached Hong Kong on 7 April. In Hong Kong, Secretary to Dr. Sun Yat-sen met Tagore and conveyed the message to him that he should first go to Peking (Beijing) instead of Canton, the seat of Dr. Sun Yet Sen, father of Chinese nationalist revolution and President of KMT.
India is our elder brother and we are the younger. This is not only an expression of courtesy, we have got ample proof of the statement in history
|54| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
Tagore and his entourage left Hong Kong on 9thApril by boat and reached Shanghai on 12th April, recounts Khitimohan Sen in his ‘Meeting of the Brothers With Gurudeva in China’, published in ‘Sino-Indian Journal’ in 1947 and reproduced by Indian Horizon in 1994. The meeting between Dr. Sun Yat-sen and Tagore, however, could not take place as South China was passing through political turbulence. On 25th April Tagore was greeted in Beijing with a rousing reception, organized by Liang Qichao, who was also the President of the Association Chinese Universities. Liang Qichao introduced Tagore to enthusiastic audience with fulsome praise and said, “India is our elder brother and we are the younger. This is not only an expression of courtesy, we have got ample proof of the statement in history”, wrote Khitimohan Sen, in his above-mentioned article. Tagore responded to the warm sentiment in equal measure and said, “I am only a poet. Mr. Liang Chi-Chao is a scholar.” During his 58 days sojourn in China, which ended on 29 May, Tagore visited important places and befriended a number of distinguished Chinese scholars who later contributed in deepening and strengthening friendship and understanding between the two countries and their people. The high point of Tagore’s visit to China was the celebration of his sixtyfourth birthday on 8 May, 1924 in Beijing, where Liang Qichao coined the Chinese name of Tagore which was ‘Zhendan’. According to Prof. Tan Chung, a distinguished China scholar of India who was conferred Padma Bhushan by government of India for a surname, Liang Qicha coined the word ‘zhu’ which was the abbreviation of Tianchu (literally ‘Heavenly India’). At a time when India and China are celebrating the poet’s 150th birth anniversary, it is worthwhile to recall the words of former Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai about the Nobel Laureate while receiving the honour Desikottama by Visva Bharati in 1956, where he said, “Tagore was not only a talented poet who had made outstanding contributions to world literature, but also an eminent representative of the great Indian people who resented darkness and strove
for brightness…”. If China impacted Indian minds, like that of Tagore, India has also equally fascinated Chinese scholars. Ji Xianlin, who passed away in July 2009, at the age of 98, was an imminent scholar whose erudition will continue to be a great source of Indian culture and tradition. The government of India, in recognition of his seminal contributions, which includes Chinese translation of Ramayana, had conferred Padma Bhushan on him in 2008. The legendary doctor Dwarkanath Kotnis was yet another iconic figure who continues to be the harbinger of Sino-Indian amity and friendship. It may be recalled that Jawaharlal Nehru, who crafted the foreign policy of India, even prior to independence, was pained when the war broke out between China and Japan in 1938. He spoke up for the Chinese people and aroused mass support for them. In this context, Marshal Zhu De, the Commander of the Eight Route Army, wrote a letter to Nehru expressing gratitude for the moral support of the Indian people, and appealed for the medical supplies, surgical instruments and to train doctors and nurses. Zhu De’s appeal stirred Nehru to give a call for China Solidarity Day throughout India on 9 January 1938. He also took the initiative to send a medical team with necessary supplies and instruments to China as a token of the Indian peoples’ sympathy and solidarity with the Chinese people in their struggle against colonialism and imperialism. The medical team selected by a committee headed by Dr. Jivraj Mehta, was led by Dr. M. Atal and had in it Dr. M.R. Cholkar, Dr. Bijay Kumar Basu, Dr. Deben Mukherjee and the young doctor Dwarkanath Kotnis. The Indian medical mission to China was the first of its kind to be sent by any foreign country. Kotnis had just done his MBBS and was set on a career of further studies when the call came. Yanan, in North Shanxi province, was the revolutionary base area set up by the Chinese Communists on the lines of Soviets in Russia. It was here that the fighting was still going on and the medical aid was necessary. Impressed with the competence and dedication of the Indian doctors,
The tomb of Dwarkanath Kotnis in China
the Chinese left an entire hospital at Kweimow in their charge, and in their hospital at Kweimow, Dr. Kotnis conducted a number of major and minor operations and cured hundreds of wounded soldiers for whom such medical facilities would have otherwise been impossible. Dr. Kotnis discharged his responsibilities with dedication despite personal setbacks. His father in the meanwhile passed away on December 28, 1938, under very tragic circumstances and the economic backbone of the family was broken. Although he was deeply saddened, he maintained his poise and spirit of service and remained committed to the mission of his life. Though, basically he was a medical practitioner, he identified himself with the Chinese cause virtually leading the life of a proletarian comrade. He fell in love with Guo Qinglan, a medical practitioner in the Eighth Route Army in 1939. Their love culminated in marriage in November 1941. Kotnis developed proficiency in Chinese language and political education with the help of Guo Qinglan. While his indomitable zeal never deterred him from discharging his duty, Kotnis developed serious illness towards 1941 and his health started deteriorating fast. It is believed that he developed malaria which was endemic at that time. The best medical facilities and attention was offered to him by the Chinese authorities. In spite of this, however he died on 9 December 1942
at a young age of 32 only. His death was deeply mourned by the Chinese people and leaders. Rich tributes were paid to him when he died by leaders such as Mao Zedong, Zhou Enlai, Zhu De and Madam Sun Yat-sen. Zhou Enlai in a condolence letter to the bereaved Kotnis family wrote that Dr. Kotnis was a symbol of the friendship between the great Chinese and Indian nations and a shining example of the Indian people. The epitaph that Marshal Zhu De wrote on Kotnis’ tomb is worth mentioning. He wrote, “Brought up on the banks of the Ganges, you came to take part in our struggle in the Shanxi-Qatar-Hebei Border Region. An international doctor, your radiance will illuminate our two great Nations.” It is high time that we revisit the seminal contributions of these two iconic figures who immensely contributed for the lasting goodwill and understanding between the two countries and their people. At a time when the two countries and their people are redefining their cultural, philosophical and political narrative, it is time these facts are find fresh insight and added lustre.
Rup Narayan Das is a Sr. Fellow at the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA)
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |55|
INFOCUS | INDIA-CHINA | CULTURE
ICEC Mansarovar Project
Cultural park for all religions It was the 11th century Tibetan poet who once said: “There is no place more powerful for practice, more blessed, or more marvelous than this (Mount Kailash). May all pilgrims and practitioners be welcome.” How true! |50| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
K
ailash Mansarovar, located in Ngari in Tibet China, is considered sacred in five religions – Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Taoism and Tibetan Bonism. It is one of the most important destinations for all pilgrims. It is the ultimate dream of a pilgrim to visit Kailash Mansarovor, at least once in a lifetime. However, due to the harsh environment, arduous journey and lack of proper facilities at the site of the pilgrimage, it is difficult for millions of pilgrims to fulfill their life-long dream. Fortunately, since July 2010, the Ngari Airport has started operations it will take only 40 minutes from New Delhi by flight to reach the pilgrimage site as compared to several days of journey. This will lead to encourage many Indians to visit Mansarovar. Idea At present, the facilities at Kailash are not up to the mark. In fact HE Mr. Sun Yuxi, former Ambassador of China to India’s visit to Akshardham in Gandhinagar for an ICEC programme two years ago ignited the idea of developing a Cultural Park at Kailash Mansarovar for pilgrims. A lot of research and discussions have since gone into the idea and the Panzhihua Guanghua Group Real Estate Development Co. with support from the local government has started to develop a cultural centre and other local facilities at the site to make the pilgrim’ stay easy and comfortable. ICEC has been entrusted with the task of involving all major religious and spiritual stake holders in India to come and discuss ideas to make this Cultural Park to meet the requirements and needs of all religions and make it one of the best in the world. Plan The India China Economic & Cultural Council (ICEC) will understand the requirement for such a site and the associate religious sensitivities. In association with the Center for the South Asia and Western China Cooperation and Development Studies, Sichuan University, the ICEC organized a historic summit on the “Kailash Mansarovar Culture Park” on 16 May 2011 in Delhi.
Action The ICEC personally met all major religions representatives and invited them to the summit which included Swaminarayan, ISKCON, Ram Krishna Mission, Ram Chandra Mission, JITO, Sheth Anandji Kalyanji Trust ( Jains) among others to discuss and share their individual and religions points of view. The ICEC also invited people who have already visited Kailash Mansarovar to understand the journey from the pilgrims point of view. Summit People from the two governments, above mentioned religious groups, cultural organizations and business enterprises were also present at the forum and shared their suggestions for the Cultural Park.
Agenda The agenda was to bring all the ideas on the table and decide on the future action plan. It was also agreed in the preliminary discussion to form a committee who will continue to meet at regular intervals once the work has started to discuss on the changes and improvisations as and when needed. They will also have a task to implement the agreed ideas and suggestions during the construction work. Suggestions It was a very interesting discussion and the wealth of knowledge and experience which was shared during the summit was compared to nothing else. With so many different religions and spiritual representations we had some very interesting suggestions from all participants. Some of the suggestions
Those who attended Name
Organization
Mr. Jagat Shah
Convenor, Kailash Mansarovar Cultural Park
Mr. Akshaya K. Jain
Akshaya Jain & Raka Chakravarty (Temple Designing)
Ms. Alice Wang
Director, China National Tourist Office
Mr. Deepak Agarwal
Mangla Exports Inc. (Temple builder)
Mr. Vrajendra Nandan Prabhu ISKCON Mohd. Saqib,
Secretary General, ICEC
Mr. Yang Tianlong
Chairman of Panzhihua Guanghua Group Real Estate Development Co.(PGG), Ltd. & Vice Chairman, China South Asian Business Council
Mr. Atul Shunglu
Assistant Secretary General, FICCI
Mr. Sumeet Gupta,
Adani AgriLogistics Pvt Ltd.
Mr. Kalpesh Bhatt
Swaminarayan Akshardham
Mr. Jayesh Gadhia
Swaminarayan Akshardham
Mr. Jignesh Shelat
Ram Chandra Mission
Dr. R.N. Das
Senior Fellow, IDSA.
Mr. K C Gandhi
UPES
Mr. Arun Pandeya
CEO - Air Canada
Mr. Xiaojun Li,
CEO, Dragon Exim (India) Private Limited
Mr. Shishodia
Adani AgriLogistics Pvt Ltd July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |51|
INFOCUS | INDIA-CHINA | CULTURE
agreed during the meeting were as follows: 1] Acclimatization: Pilgrims coming from different areas and weather conditions might have some issues to get acclimatized to the extreme weather at Kailash, especially if they reach from a hot and humid weather such as Delhi to an extremely cold Kailash in 40 minutes.
2] Logistics: To take care of logistic requirements for people visiting the cultural park. 3] Construction: To include the ideas and inputs of all the religions involved. 4] Food: Certain religions have specific requirements for food which has to be looked into. 5] Religious sensitivities: To
|52| India-China Chronicle  July-August 2011
understand and follow certain issues relating to the religious sensitivities of various groups. 6] Information and awareness about Kailash Mansarovar: To encourage more and more people to visit the centre. 7] Museum: To develop a museum to share the information and ideas relating to Mansarovar involving all religions. 8] To develop a research lab for studying the geographic impacts and the changes that have occurred in Kailash over a period of time. 9] To develop a library with Indian and Chinese literature to share knowledge with the visitors at the centre. 10] To develop a language centre to learn about and share different cultures and religions. Next step It was decided to take a trial flight of 40 people from Delhi in July as the first group. This will consist of religious groups present at the meeting and committee members to overlook the construction and implement the suggestions discussed at the summit. ď ą
INFOCUS | INDIA-CHINA | CULTURE
From India to China
The Zen of Buddhism A religion that had its roots in India but blossomed in faraway China. P S Deodhar
C
ivilizations, they say, grew along the banks of rivers being our life lines. World’s oldest international highway, the Silk Route helped export Buddhism to China. Besides silk, paper and other goods, the Silk Road carried another commodity which was equally significant in world history, Buddhism. It became the vehicle which spread Buddhism through Afghanistan, Central Asia, Xinjiang (Chinese Turkistan), China, |44| India-China Chronicle  July-August 2011
Korea and Japan. Buddhism not only affected the lives and cultures of those regions but also left us with a world of wonders in arts and literature. Buddhism penetrated Hun as early as the 2nd century BC but took roots after 65AD when the Han emperor Mingdi dreamt about Buddha and sent his official Cai Yin to India to learn more about Buddhism. Cai Yin returned with two Buddhist monks named She-mo-teng and Chu-fa-lan to preach in China. Soon a Buddhist community was established in Loyang,
the capital and it grew continuously. Later Kublai Khan also clearly preferred Buddhism. Buddhist Marco Polo has noted that Kublai Khan accorded a magnificent ceremonial reception to the relics of the Buddha, sent to him by the raja of Ceylon. Most of Kublai’s successors were equally fervent Buddhists. Buddhist scholar, Bodhi Dharma travelled from India to China along with other monks in 475 AD. Bodhi Dharma introduced the teachings of the Buddha to the Chinese, who were influenced by the teachings. Buddhism and Chinese Taoism intermingled with one another. Buddhism in China reached its apogee during the Sui and Tang dynasties (581-907) but the Chinese Buddhism was distinctly different than the Indian Buddhism. Buddhism was born in India. Lord Gautama Buddha was born in Lumbini, near the small city of Kapilavastu on the borders of Nepal and India in the 6th century BC. He was born in a noble family of Shakyas and grew up as Prince Siddhartha. He is also known as Shakyamuni, ‘the Sage of the Shakyas.’ He renounced his palace life and left home in search of enlightenment after witnessing sights of suffering, sickness, aging and death. He achieved Enlightenment at Bodh-Gaya and gave his first sermon at Sarnath. He spent his remaining life in travelling, teaching and spreading Buddhism till he passed away at 80 in 484 BC. Two centuries later, it was the Maurya King Ashoka who converted to Buddhism having got disillusioned after a deadly war. It was he who vigorously spread the religion across India as far as Hindu Kush, Kabul, Gandhara and other parts of north-western India. This provided an ideal medium for the further spread of Buddhism along the trade route. For a variety of reasons Buddhism was not accepted in China in its purely Indian form. Bodhi Dharma introduced various forms of Buddhism to China but actually there were gradual textural changes as Buddhism permeated the life of Chinese society. It was natural since China was already rich and diversified before the arrival of Buddhism across the Himalayas.
It slowly trickled into the minds and imaginations of a people. Much of this trickling occurred during the time of Emperor Mingdi and by 200 AD Chinese translations of Buddhist scriptures started to appear. The main reason for Chinese reluctance rooted in the fact that Indian Buddhism inherited the tradition of asceticism from Hindu thought. But the Chinese, as more practical people, focussed more on some compelling ideas and qualities in Buddhism which they found of value for their lives as individuals and a society. Actually Buddhism was the only religion assimilated into Chinese civilization before Christianity arrived. Prior to it Chinese life philosophy hinged on what crystallized between 250 and 600 AD in Confucianism and Taoism, with their emphasis on practical matters, such as family, civic duty, harmonious living and blending life with the natural order. Unlike in India, it emphasised on the particular rather than the general and its conduciveness to harmonious resolution rather than debate.
Experts point out that Indian and Chinese thought and culture have been never divided by more than just their languages, which indeed influenced the ideas, attitudes and even social conventions of their people. Therefore Chinese, in ancient times, philosophically lived in ‘the here and now’ and had little concern with ideas focused on the possible life after death. They point out that the limitation of word-symbols of Chinese language to express ideas of existence beyond the reality as perceived through the senses had probably caused this. Early Indian sages and thinkers however expressed the opinion that life was suffering and a sort of test or ironic game of Brahma. They thought and believed that life truly begins with death and that the physical senses often mislead people into the world of pain and misery until enlightenment frees them from their torments. That’s why Indian religious scriptures teem with words dealing with philosophical and religious abstractions. That’s why one can see that, now globally popular, Yoga uses classical Indian terms such as samsara,
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |45|
INFOCUS | INDIA-CHINA | CULTURE
maya, atman etc. For example, the average Indian sees man’s role within the context of a larger, abstract whole while the Chinese interprets everything from a personal point of view since most Chinese grow up to be utilitarian and pragmatic. The differences between Indian and Chinese culture can also be seen in common visual symbols. In Indian thought the sphere — a threedimensional embodiment of harmony — was the preferred symbol for the perfect expression of reality. Indian thinkers also considered the wheel to be a symbol of perfect reality. Here, the idea of motion was inherent in the symbolism of the wheel. Life was a wheel, in a sense, as human life rolls from birth to death to rebirth over countless incarnations. Chinese thinkers, however, once again revealed a different dimensionality in their thought processes. While the Indian symbol of perfect reality is three-dimensional and kinetic, the Chinese symbol, the circle, appears flat and stationary. The circle however appears throughout Chinese culture in many important contexts, such as the unit of the yin/yang icon. One of the most appealing premises of Buddhism is its emphasis on individual exploration, deliberation, debate and practice. According to the Buddha himself, enlightenment cannot be reached by team effort. Ultimately, it is one man or woman working alone who can uncover the path to the
For a variety of reasons Buddhism was not accepted in China in its purely Indian form. Bodhi Dharma introduced various forms of Buddhism to China but actually there were gradual textural changes as Buddhism permeated the life of Chinese society. truth. Buddha reportedly said, “Accept my words only after you have examined them for yourselves; do not accept them simply because of the reverence you have for me.” It was just this emphasis on individual action and practical rewards in the here and now which greatly appealed to many Chinese once the philosophy crossed their borders. This idiosyncratic quality developed in China takes shape in the form of the
Mahayana school. Buddhism in India was a rational evolution emerging from the context of Hindu philosophy. Buddhism accepted the Vedic posture that sense-based life is suffering and must be transcended to experience a higher state of realization. However, it differed from Hinduism on a number of important points such as the use of rites, moral precepts and the definition of God etc. The Four “Noble Truths” in Buddhism state that “suffering exists, there is a cause to suffering, suffering can cease and there is a path which leads to permanent cessation of suffering. It is interesting to note that Buddhism holds that life is suffering, not evil, such as some of the Hindu pundits proclaimed. Mahayana Buddhism, accepted in China, contradicted the doctrine of Nirvana as conceived by other Hindu thinkers. The Nirvana of the Hindu yogis was a complete annihilation of being, for they thought that existence is evil, and evil is misery, and the only way to escape misery is to destroy the root of existence, which
is nothing less than the total cessation of human desires, sensual pleasures and activities. This is a point of view antithetical to Chinese thought. It is also a point of view which Paramahansa Yogananda, a highly regarded yogi of the 20th century, does not endorse. He too says that existence is not evil, but the play or game of God. Buddha did not teach that Nirvana (complete awareness) could
be achieved through the complete cessation of existence as we commonly know it. The way to conquer suffering and attain Nirvana is outlined in the “Eightfold Path” which holds that one must develop the “right” understanding, thought or motives, speech, action, means of livelihood, effort, mindfulness and concentration. These concepts are abstract enough to inspire many contrasting canons of philosophical speculation and yet specific enough to promote a certain level of ethical commitment or behaviour in anyone who claimed to follow the Buddha’s way. Underlying these precepts are injunctions to mindfulness and compassion which adds warmth through personalization and concern for others, making the Path more than a cold list of required commandments. Chinese thinkers were especially attracted to the idea that the doctrine (Dharma) and rules of conduct were not in themselves the end, but rather practical guides to help individuals achieve their highest potential. Buddhism gradually adapted itself to Chinese attitudes and customs. The
early Chinese were especially suspect of any philosophy that taught ‘suffering in this life, happiness in the next.’ During the Han and T’ang dynasties, Buddhist ideas benefited due to the state of instability and uncertainty of those times, just the sort of environment which welcomes a point of view which admits that life is tough and that there is a way to overcome it, at least on a personal level. With the disillusionment with Confucianism, widespread anarchy and invasions by non-Chinese in the north, Buddhism made major inroads into China and also adapted itself along the way. It was during this time in the sixth century that the 28th Bodhi Dharma and thousands of less well-remembered monks communicated an alternative way of living and thinking to men and women looking for a new answer to ancient concerns. Chinese Buddhism, Mahayana and Zen, took on a very different cast from its expression in India. Chinese scholars were quick to translate the sutras into their native tongue but not without reflecting certain national idiosyncrasies. China’s
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |47|
classical conservative ways of thinking modified the form of its reception of Buddhism. Chinese Buddhists took over the doctrine founded and taught by Sakyamuni, and considered it their duty to exalt their interpretation of his teaching, in spite of the fact that Chinese Buddhism differs from Indian Buddhism in many respects. Therefore, they rewrote arbitrarily even the sentences of the sutra. This modified Mahayana Buddhism therefore appealed to the Chinese during its period of greatest acceptance when the promise of a higher life beyond the suffering of the present was a strong cultural idea; something which neither Confucianism nor Taoism could provide. Unlike the Theravada school popular in southern Asia, however, Mahayana Buddhism placed more focus on helping others achieve the goal of liberation. This led to the ideal of the bodhisattva, the saint who comes to the threshold of Nirvana and proceeds no further, accepting reincarnation in the world until others experience freedom. Bodhisattvic philosophers would not be content with thinking things through for themselves; they wouldn’t rest until their students, too, were well on their way to understanding. Zen Buddhism, on the other hand, is the most and least mystical of religion-philosophies; the most, if by mysticism you mean focus on the inner life and cultivation of insight; the least, to the extent that Zen teaches
that there is no other reality than everyday life. China was, after all, the home of Taoism, one of the premier mystical traditions of the world. Taoism, most noted for its colourful rituals and magic, has as its foundation a profound tradition of introspection; understanding of the essential elements of life, as expressed through nature and beauty. The Chinese have always been utilitarian, down-to-earth people, more concerned with creature comforts and practicality than the abstract concepts addressed by Buddhism. Therefore the Chinese hunger for ideas, as opposed to a specific religious “solution,” led to the unique symbiosis of Buddhism, Confucianism and Taoism in China through modern times — a situation where worldly people and intellectuals alike combined elements of all three philosophies in constructing their own, individual perspectives. This emphasis on individualism also is a Chinese characteristic which shaded its approach to Buddhism. As Buddhism became more “human” in China, it also had something to contribute to Chinese ideas about man and his place in society. Apart from the strict social codes of Confucianism, there was little in Chinese ethical thought relating to the obligations of the individual to others not in his family. One of the ways in which Buddhist ideas freshened stale patterns of thought and enriched the moral texture of the nation was through
|48| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
the introduction of altruism and the concept of the bodhisattva mentioned above. Like in India, in China too, ethics was written and taught for the use of those literate few who were the potential leaders of the people. The common people, being illiterate, were expected to follow the practices of the literate; hence if morality was taught to the literates, it would spread through the society. What started out in India as an abstract concept, in China took root because it was an idea with practical consequences. From the first century onward, Buddhist ideas about man’s responsibility to others resulted in the growth of relief measures to aid the poor, medical treatment even for the indigent and education offered through the temple. Chinese Buddhists performed these acts not out of individual concern for others, but rather “to identify with others” in the sense that one should achieve oneness with the Tao and identity with all sentient beings. Bodhidharma is credited with introducing Zen in the sixth century to a China which already had proven fertile ground for the development of Buddhism. It suited the Chinese tradition of practicality, common sense and its matter-of-factness. However once the path of nonverbal, direct awareness entered the Chinese consciousness, profound changes occurred. To many observers, the
convergence of Buddhism and Taoism in China and its later refinement in Japan produced the philosophy we know today as Zen. Zen in China challenged the ritual trappings which impeded intellectual and spiritual progress. Ritual, at the popular level, persisted in all religious practices —Zen-like practices included; it was Zen’s emphasis on a monastic, more contemplative existence which inspired intellectual consideration of the role of ritual in the pursuit of truth. Zen masters criticized reliance on rituals for a number of reasons: one begins to depend on the practice of rites for the comfort of a pseudoreligious atmosphere; rites encourage personal laziness and discourage individual search for answers; one becomes attached to temples or other sites and to certain modes of behaviour, none of which inspire bold individual initiatives; rituals can lull us to sleep philosophically and spiritually, acting as a kind of Novocaine of the mind and soul. This manifestation of religion
is today seen everywhere in India; actually more in educated rich than the poor have-nots! The Indian goal, whether intellectual or spiritual, is to transcend nature, which is often portrayed as a deluder of the senses, in order to attain a higher order of consciousness. In contrast, the practical Chinese mind delights in a nature which is the source of all good things. For this reason, when Buddhism became part of the Chinese mindscape, love of nature and what is “natural” became a significant part of its philosophy. Nirvana which in India was perceived as a state akin to samadhi, or ultimate transcendence, became in China a state of heightened, all-absorbing awareness of a reality which included nature and the ordinary. Members of a Buddhist sect taught that all existences — even grass, trees, and earth can attain Buddhahood. Because they were forced to express this unique philosophy in non-logical terms and because of the limitations of the Chinese language,
Zen adepts became masters of the arts such as calligraphy, ink painting, archery, flower arrangement, and impressionistic poetry. According to the Zen practitioner it is about the search of the most ordinary of questions: “Why am I here?” and “What am I supposed to do about it?” Even at the outer limits of philosophical inquiry, the Chinese manage to bring a “down to earth” attitude to whatever they undertake. As a result of these adaptations, Buddhism in its Chinese incarnation flourished in China by the 11th century whereas by then it had all but disappeared in India!!.
PS Deodhar is President of India China Economic and Cultural Council. He can be reached at psdeodhar@icec-council.org.
Our Experience, Your Imagination
Tour Packages-inbound and outbound. Have got qualified Chinese language experts in the company and also in its panel. Experienced in handling MICE events.
Era Tours & Travels (India) Pvt. Ltd. (Recognised by Ministry of Tourism, Govt. of India)
210 New Delhi House, 27 Barakhamba Road, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 (India) Tel.: (0091-11) 23323190, 23711404, 23311337 Fax: 011-66304663 E-mail: richanayal@hotmail.com, info@eraindiatours.com Website: www.eraindiatours.com
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |49|
INFOCUS | INDIA-CHINA | ECONOMIC CONFERENCE
Pump up the wares, not beware
Reshaping the world economy China and India can complement each other by building good synergy between hardware and software—or in other words between the world’s factory and the world’s office.
Zhang Yan
C
hina and India’s economic emergence has been a hot topic nowadays. To discuss their economic performance and economic cooperation surely is an even hotter subject. I am grateful for ICS and ICEC (India China Economic and Cultural Council) for organizing this conference which I deem very timely and pertinent and I am happy to share some of my views with you. China and India, as two great civilizations, have come back to the centre of the world stage as economic powers in the process of the past few decades. With 2.5 billion population, huge markets and continuously
expanding economy, China and India are showing the potential of reshaping the future of the world economy. Against the adverse global economic environment brought about by the financial crisis, China and India economies maintained robust growths at 10.3% and 8.7% respectively in 2010. It has been widely predicted that both countries will maintain the momentum of high growth in the coming years. People around the world are making all kinds of projections about the future of China and India economies. It is encouraging to know that most of them are positive. As for China, the past few years have witnessed rapid increase of overall national economic strength.
|40| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
However, in spite of the excellent economic performance and remarkable improvement of people’s living standard, we are soberly aware that China is still a developing country in many senses. Although China’s GDP ranks second in the world, but in per capita terms, it is still lagging far behind. Furthermore, China’s development is not quite balanced in terms of economic structure and distribution of wealth. Challenges, such as energy, resources and environment constraints will not go away easily. It is true that China is a leading producer of many products, but it remains at the lower end of the global industrial chain. We still heavily depend on the core technologies from developed countries.
In the second decade of the 21st century, China, like India, is trying hard to search for a more efficient, healthier and sustainable way to develop its economy. The just concluded Chinese National People’s Congress has adopted the 12th Five-Year Plan which has laid out the road map for the future development of China in all fronts. From which one can see the shift of the focus of its economic development. First, China attaches more importance on the quality of its economic growth rather than merely on the growth rate. It sets the target of annual growth rate of 7% for the next five years. The main purpose is to transform the pattern of economic growth, adjust the economic structure so as to raise the quality and efficiency of economic performance rather than mere figures. Second, China will further consolidate and strengthen the position of agriculture as the foundation of the economy. Third, China is to mobilize its domestic market to ensure a sustained growth instead of relying heavily on foreign demand. Expanding domestic consumption is a long-term strategy of China’s economic development as well as a fundamental means for promoting balanced economic development. Fourth, China will continue to undertake scientific development. More emphasis will be given to new and green technologies. The energy and resource efficiency, and environmentfriend will be the key parameters of the economic growth. At the same time more emphasis will be put on the use and innovation of advanced technologies to turn “China produce” into “China design” or “China invent”. Fifth, more importantly, in the new five-year plan, the Chinese government is giving increasing attention to the wellbeing of its peoples and measures are going to be taken to improve the distribution of wealth among the people and different regions with the aim to narrow the gap and make sure that each and every citizen enjoy the fruits of economic growth, so as to achieve an inclusive development and promote social harmony. With the implementation of the
12th five-year plan, I am sure that China’s economy will achieve a steadier, healthier and relatively fast speed of development in a comprehensive, balanced, coordinated and sustainable manner. I must point out that to achieve the set objectives, China cannot do without interacting with the rest of the world. China will stick to the path of peaceful development, continue to
China and India, as two great civilizations, have come back to the centre of the world stage as economic powers in the process of the past few decades. With 2.5 billion population, huge markets and continuously expanding economy, China and India are showing the potential of reshaping the future of the world economy.
pursue its policy of open to the outside and engage in mutually beneficial cooperation with all countries in the world, especially the neighboring countries. As has already been proven, China’s development is an opportunity to other countries rather than a threat. And it will remain to be so. China and India are already important economic and trade partners. In 2010, the bilateral trade has reached USD 61.76 billion, an increase of 42.4% from 2009. At present, China is a leading trading partner of India, and India ranks No. 9 among China’s partners. During Premier Wen Jiabao’s visit to India last December, the two countries agreed to set 100 billion USD as a new target for bilateral trade by 2015. This is encouraging. However, compared with China’s trade volume with Japan, South Korea and ASEAN this is far from big enough. Taken the size of economy and population, as well as the geographic proximity of two countries into consideration, there are still vast space and great potential for us to explore. Apart from trade, China and India can be partners in investment and financial cooperation. India has launched a massive scheme of
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |41|
INFOCUS | INDIA-CHINA | ECONOMIC CONFERENCE
infrastructure development which requires huge financial resources and technical expertise. With 2.8 trillion USD foreign exchange reserve and rich experience in infrastructure development, China is no doubt an ideal partner for India to work with. China will accelerate the “go global” strategy and encourage the qualified enterprises and individuals to invest overseas. China and India also can work together in manufacturing and hightech sector. In these areas, both have its edges. China is strong in manufacturing, while India is good at information technology, outsourcing service, banking and bio-technology, just to name a few. Two countries can complement each other in these and other areas by building a good synergy between the hardware and software and between world factory and the
in the new five-year plan, the Chinese government is giving increasing attention to the wellbeing of its peoples and measures are going to be taken to improve the distribution of wealth among the people and different regions with the aim to narrow the gap and make sure that each and every citizen enjoy the fruits of economic growth
|42| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
world office. Furthermore, China and India should continue to work together to build a more fair and equitable international economic and financial system. The two countries need to strengthen policies in order to promote a robust, sustainable and balanced growth of the world economy. And at the same time, the two countries should work together to help other developing countries. To further advance China and India economic cooperation, I think additional efforts should be made in the following areas: 1. Diversify the economic cooperation. We should be bolder and creative in promoting our cooperation. Mutual investments, cooperation in financial sector should be intensified. Economic and trade free zones and high-tech parks should
be set up in respective countries to provide platforms for entrepreneurs and business people to interact directly. Besides, joint undertakings on projects in third countries should be looked into. 2. Strive for a balanced bilateral trade. China is fully aware that an imbalanced trade is unsustainable in the long run. Efforts should be made by both sides to expand the scope and varieties of our trade so that we can gradually reduce the gap and achieve a balanced and healthy growth of bilateral trade. With the aftermath of financial crisis lingering on, we see a rise of various forms of protectionism. The two countries should resolutely oppose any form of protectionism so as to provide an environment conducive for trade cooperation. 3. Negotiate Bilateral Free Trade Agreement or Regional Trade Arrangement. Both FTA and RTA are all useful tools in facilitating bilateral trade in a big way. China and
India should start as early as possible the negotiation process. As a first step we can work on a Regional Trade Arrangement, and at the same time prepare the ground for a fullfledged FTA. 4. Set up new mechanisms. On this point I am happy to say that the two sides are working vigorously on setting up the mechanisms of Strategic Economic Dialogue and CEO Forum. Both will become new platform for the two sides to address differences and enhance cooperation. 5. Last but not the least, China and India should make good use of intellectual resources to serve our economic interests. Joint studies and researches should be undertaken by our academia, scholars and experts on common challenges like how to ensure the energy and resources security, how to avoid the “population dividend” becoming “population burden” as well as how to avoid falling into the “middleincome trap”. I am of the view these are
the issues China and India must jointly handle properly if we want to reach our economic development goal. China and India are facing unprecedented opportunity of development. The leaderships of two countries are taking a long-term and strategic perspective on our bilateral relations. Both sides are getting more and more mature in handling challenges and remaining difficult issues in our relations and not letting them hinder our cooperation. What we need is not only good vision but also firm actions. As Mr Deng Xiaoping once said, the 21st century would not be the Asian Century if China and India are not developed. I believe that China and India are ready to work together to translate it into a reality. (This is the speech delivered by the Chinese Ambassador to India HE Zhang Yan at the Conference on “India-China Economic Relations and Performance in the 21st Century” held by the ICEC in March 20121.)
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |43|
INFOCUS | COVER STORY | MEDIA | SURVEY
Media on both sides
Doomsday Conspirators Co-operation rather than conflict should have been the leitmotif of their rise as global economic powers, but both China and India have failed to dispel the mutual suspicion that blights bilateral ties. And the media must shoulder a lot of the blame. PD Kaushik
I
n a democracy, media is the fourth estate, comprising both print and electronic medium. It is more powerful than the legislature, executive and judiciary because of its reach and impact on public opinion. It is a common feeling that media on both sides of the border has not played a constructive role in improving relations between the two countries. For instance, media in India and China have downplayed positive achievements, but negative incidents have been blown out of proportions. Such coverage and reporting have adversely impacted public opinion in both countries. Is the media to be blamed for such sensational coverage merely to catch eyeballs or are there other issues which dictate media coverage. A nationwide survey on such perceptions, however, contradicts the myth of negative reporting. The overall sample of the survey comprised 20 per cent respondents from the Indian media and 10 per cent from the Chinese media. In fact, it is interesting to note that media on both sides of the border suffers from lots of misconceptions about each other. Indian journalists felt India was not even on the radar of the Chinese media because more newsworthy actions are taking place in other parts of the world. Chinese journalists however felt that
the Indian media ape the West and frequently indulges in China-bashing. Individual opinion is the key for any policy initiative. The results so far reveal that media is perhaps the only category of respondents who had emphatically responded in either a ‘Yes’ or a ‘No’, unlike other categories where the percentage of ‘Undecided’ was considerably high. For instance, almost one out of every four respondent was undecided in China. In the development of a concrete action plan, a clear ‘Yes’ or a clear ‘No’ is of immense help. Both countries must strive through public policy intervention to convert the ‘No’ into ‘Yes’ for everlasting peace and economic cooperation in the region. Threat Perception How do the media look at the threat perception? Almost 63 per cent media persons in India view China as a threat to India. The most common reason for such an opinion can be attributed to strong China-Pakistan ties. Likewise, almost 60 per cent media persons in China also feel that “India is a threat to China.” The issue of Tibet and growing closeness of India with the United States were some of the reasons for such a perception. Such kind of threat perception existing in the minds of media persons on both sides of the border is understandable. Since media keeps a continuous watch on the actions of the government, any inconsistency in government’s public posturing sows the seeds of suspicion in the minds. China’s equivocal stand on the issue of Pak-supported terrorist outfits and insurgency activities in Kashmir, clandestine military and technological aid to Pakistan, etc., raise the suspicions of the Indian media on the bonafide intentions of China for peaceful and strong relations with India. Likewise, the existence of the Government of Tibet in exile in Dharamshala in India and India’s official position on Tibet is viewed as inconsistent and contradictory by the Chinese media. Thus, media persons on both sides of the border rate the opposite side as a looming threat. The threat perception in the media also seems to have a regional variation.
China Response: By Occupation Others 17%
32% 9%
Media 29%
13%
Academics Business Government
India Response: By Occupation Others 21%
19% 20%
Media 20%
20%
Academics Business Government
Almost 63 per cent media persons in India view China as a threat to India. The most common reason for such an opinion can be attributed to strong China-Pakistan ties. Likewise, almost 60 per cent media persons in China also feel that “India is a threat to China.” Almost 60 per cent in the Indian media located in the North, South and West suffer from a higher threat perception. But a minority in the East and Central region viewed China as a
threat. Perhaps the Central region has a lower threat perception due to its location and its level of development, both social and economic. But the low threat perception in the East was quite unexpected. A majority of the news reporting incursions by the Chinese army comes from the eastern side. So could it be construed that more than 30 years of uninterrupted Left rule in the East has somewhat influenced the media favourably towards China? Except for political reasons, one cannot attribute the rationale for such a response. Thus, it can be safely concluded that awareness levels about the issues between India and China are high in the media, as compared with other occupation categories. Besides, political, economic and social development has a strong bearing on perception of the media.
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |35|
INFOCUS | COVER STORY | MEDIA | SURVEY
Improving Ties On improved and peaceful relations, 92 per cent Indians and 75 per cent Chinese want improved relations between India and China. Around 5 per cent Indians and 19 per cent Chinese opted for “Undecided.” This response may be indicative of a general lack of awareness about India among the Chinese or vice-versa. It is interesting to note there is still an insignificant minority view in both countries, who exactly feel the opposite. Around 3 per cent Indians and 7 per cent Chinese do not want improved relations between the two countries. Even though a minority, but still it is imperative to understand the background of the respondents to formulate a coherent view on their choice. The strong preference for improved relations in India is evenly distributed among all occupations. However, it is interesting to note that such is not in the case in China. Mainly those categorise
Threat Perception in Indian Media: Regionwise Basis Central
18%
23%
23% 14%
West
23%
East South North
under ‘Others’ and ‘Business’ exhibited a strong preference for improved relations with India. But the Chinese media was somewhat not convinced on this issue with a very low preference (almost 9 per cent) for improved ties with India. This is an interesting observation, which conclusively points
|36| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
out to the reasons for the alleged negative reporting. When the media in China has a strong threat perception from India, it is understandable that news reports would focus on issues which strengthen their commonly held belief. On the contrary, almost 18 per cent government officials and 13 per cent academics in China favoured improved relations with India. In other words, such a response was on expected lines because of the official position of China in respect to ties between the two countries. An overwhelmingly favourable response was received for improvement of ties by all occupations in India. However, 3 per cent did not favour the proposition. Among these, almost 63 per cent represented the media. In no uncertain terms, the same reasons as observed in China could be attributed to the Indian response. The analysis of undecided responses gives an interesting insight about the perception of people on both sides of the border. The ‘Media’ clocked the lowest in the undecided category in both countries on this issue. In other words, the media on both sides of the border have very strong views on this subject whether favourable or unfavourable. However, in the ‘Business’ category, almost 39 per cent in India and 30 per cent in China remained undecided on the issue of improved relations between the two countries. A widely held apprehension among Indian manufacturers is about the excessive inflow of Chinese goods once relations between India and
Improved Relations 100 80 60
Indians
40
Chinese
20 0 Yes
No
Regional Distribution: Undecided on Improved Relations
60 50 40 30
India
20
China
10 0
North
West
China improve, and vice-versa. The Western region in China and Eastern region in India have conflicting views on strengthening India-China ties, which reflect on the large majority of respondents from these respective regions being ‘Undecided.’ Doing Business Unresolved border
disputes
South
East
Central
considerably downplayed the business interest of the Chinese business community. Only 22 per cent respondents from China felt safe to do business with India. Around 31 per cent Chinese felt unsafe to do business with India under the prevalent circumstances while 46 per cent were undecided. On the other side, business interests ruled the Indian perception against
unresolved border disputes. Almost 71 per cent Indians felt safe to do business with China despite border disputes. Media, once again on both sides of the border, exhibited its suspicions in favour of the proposition. In India, the media preferred a resolution of border disputes before any close business engagement. In other words, the media was a majority,
July-August 2011  India-China Chronicle |37|
INFOCUS | COVER STORY | MEDIA | SURVEY
Business Interest Despite Unresolved Border Issues 80 70 60 50 40 30
Indians
20
Chinese
10 0
Yes
No
Can’t Say almost 49 per cent, among those who were opposed to doing business despite the unresolved border dispute. A similar response was received from the Chinese media, comprising almost 54 per cent among those who felt unsafe to do business with India. Largely, the Indian perception was uniformly distributed across occupation and region in favour of doing business despite the unresolved border dispute. Respondents were of the view that resolving the borderrelated dispute was a major challenge for both countries but it that it would not be beneficial to both countries if business interests were clubbed with border related disputes. Politics and economics must be kept apart for safeguarding national interest. In fact, this view was held by a majority of youth in the 19-30 and 31-40 age groups (almost 60 per cent). On the Chinese side, the perception exhibited suspicion and caution. The media exhibited serious reservations on the issue. Only 11 per cent respondents from academics and 12 per cent from
|38| India-China Chronicle  July-August 2011
Occupation Distribution: Chinese Favouring on Business despiteUnresolved Border Disputes Academic 11%
Others 27%
Business 32%
Media 12% Government 18%
Occupation Distribution: Chinese Undecided on Doing Business despite Unresolved Border Disputes Academic 13%
Others 33%
Media 8%
Business 17%
Government 29%
the media felt it was safe to do business with India despite unresolved border disputes. One view was influenced by the threat perception, but the other view was more dismissive on account of security of business interest, especially in the light of terrorist threat and civil unrest in India.
All those who felt that the border dispute needed to be resolved first were mainly from the ‘Others’ category (34 per cent). But on this proposition, there was a large majority of undecided respondents (46 per cent) in China. Mostly respondents from the ‘Others’ category (33 per cent) were undecided,
followed by Government (29 per cent). It is evident that a lack of awareness about India has left many Chinese undecided on the proposition, especially lawyers, doctors, consultants, etc. It is also understandable for the respondents from the government to take up a cautious approach because of the unresolved border issues. The media on both sides of the border remained lowest in the ‘Undecided’ category. Thus, it can be safely concluded that the opinion makers have become highly opinionated. It is imperative to understand that the media is not indulging in negative reporting by choice in their pursuit for sensationalism. In fact, the government’s vacillating stand and equivocal talk puts the Fourth Estate in a highly confusing situation and make them more suspicious. The belief of such a threat pushes the media to report the information which confirms their belief and ignore the information which belies their perception. Therefore, it will be wrong to blame the media for negative reporting. This observation leads to a suggestion that government interventions and stand should be unequivocal and transparent to instill a confidence in the media and change their overall perceptions. The government’s action should be directed at changing the threat perception which lurks in the minds of journalists on both sides of the border. When both governments conduct confidence building measures, it is imperative to allow the media to interact with the interlocutors so that their general awareness is raised and there is a perceptible change in their beliefs. This change of perception in the media will ensure that some of the negative issues are downplayed and positive issues get wider publicity for the larger public interest.
PD Kaushik is Associate Director of the Rajiv Gandhi Institute for Contemporary Studies. His views in this article are personal)
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |39|
INFOCUS | COVER STORY | MEDIA | VOICES
VOICES The media seems to be at war where India and China are concerned. Facts do not seem to matter as some Indian media organisations believe that is the best way to grab a larger market share. Similar responses are emerging from the Chinese side as well. The threat to a stable India-China relationship seems coming not from the governments, but from sections within the media. We spoke to a cross-section of media representatives to get their versions.
Better ties better coverage
Raghav Bahl
Founder and Editor, Network 18
O
n media perception: There are negative vibes in the India-China relationship and the media reflect these. It is possible to question the tone, the pitch or even the twist but no one disagrees that it is a cobbled, not smooth, relationship. Stapled visas, the construction of roads and railways along the border, the military build-up, the supply of nuclear reactors to Pakistan, the India-US civil nuclear deal, the opposition to India getting a waiver at the Nuclear Suppliers’ Club, the cozy relationship with Pakistan, the Dalai Lama’s activities, all these may be negative but they reflect reality. There is however a lot of positive coverage in the Indian media about China’s economic achievements. India has made China the standard, for instance, when it aspires for Mumbai to be like Shanghai, or strives to attain Chinese rates of growth. I would be surprised if relations improved and media coverage did not. On so-called “national interests”: Though the Indian media are privately owned, and do not take cues from the government, on strategic issues there is broad national consensus The secretive nature of the Chinese state creates apprehensions. There is much ignorance in India about what caused the 1962 war and the balance of blame. In China, I believe, the war itself is not well-known, so there is inadequate appreciation of Indian sensitivities. The Indian government itself laments that it only gets flak from the media and little positive coverage! So the complainers
|28| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
across the border have company! Compulsions of geo-politics: India is a status-quoist power; it does not have territorial ambitions or spheres of influence. Our markets may be similar in labour intensive manufactures, but there the media blame Indian policy and the difficulty of doing business in India, rather than the Chinese for being competitive and getting a bigger share of the world market. In fact sections of the Indian media have been saying that the government must address security issues, if any, without depriving Indian power producers or telecom service providers of cheaper Chinese equipment. The media prodding the government to be aggressive like China in securing oil supplies or winning Central Asian and African friends should not be seen as a clash. Every country has a right to pursue its self-interest. Why negative coverage: Since 2003 when Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee visited China, the two countries are building on the areas that bind, while not harping on the issues they differ on. International cooperation happens in areas of agreement. But the differences are critical. The media cannot ignore them. For instance, can it gloss over the little or no progess in resolving the border dispute despite many highlevel meetings? China’s influence: China’s media influence reflects it’s economic, and consequently, strategic heft. But is the Western media less critical about China on, say, human rights or the exchange-rate? Agreed, there is wider and deeper coverage of China in the Western media. The India media, and certainly the TV channels need to have more journalists in China, and cover a wide range of issues. Often it is cost that decides issues like placement of journalists and not a lack of interest in developments in China. In fact there is a huge interest in India about China. The Chinese embassy in Delhi should engage journalists continually. It must promote study of the Chinese language. Why does it not set up a Confucius Institute in New Delhi to begin with? A larger constituency in either country can act as a pressure group for better relations. Civilisational links: Yes, Buddhism is a link. Both people also share certain common values. But national interests can differ despite affinities between people. India, China, US: It is a multi-polar world with one hyperpower. But even the US knows how far it can stretch. For India, it would be unwise to thwart China’s rise. It is also unrealistic to expect that India can be weaned away from the United States; they have much at stake mutually. India should try balance its relationship with both countries and profit from it.
No full stops
Wang Lei
Correspondent based in New Delhi of the People’s Daily, China
S
eeing is believing. That’s so true for a country like India. India is indeed famous for its diversity and the Indian people known for their hospitality. I have been living and working in India for around three years. I am so glad to have experienced this country first hand rather than from books! Before I set foot here, most books I read introduced the Caste system. If I did not know India, I would tend to believe that the caste system is the most important part of this society. Actually, it is only a deep-rooted concept in peoples’ mind, and not many people are willing to talk about it openly. Anyway, the Indian constitution claims that India is a secular country and that the caste system should be abolished. One China scholar made a perceptive remark about India when he said that any conclusion you draw about India may be right, but then the very opposite could also hold true. The diversity of India is reflected in many aspects. India has 22 official languages, and 400 smaller tongues and dialects. Indian society is made up of nearly 5000 castes and communities, each with its own rules, customs and stories. India gave birth to four world religions and its 33 million gods. I believe that no other such diversified state can be found at any other place around the world. Its diversity is just like the masalas (spices) produced here in all its colours and different smells. I have to confess that for a foreign journalist working in India can be a baffling experience nevertheless. Going from one state to another is like passing from one country to another. I do not know the official language Hindi, so English is the only tool for communication. But people from different ‘Pradeshes’ (states) speak English with their own accent and sometimes it becomes very difficult to understand. Language is only one aspect but the real challenges are the local food and living habits. As a Chinese journalist who lives in India, I have to face the same problem like other foreigners; the slowness,
whether in the bureaucratic system or on the road. But I cannot conceal the fact that I really appreciate the private service system, for example the service at hotels and restaurants. Some other things leave me quite incredulous such as when you can bargain the penalty with the traffic police when I am stopped by them. I cannot imagine such things in my country. I really appreciate the flexibility of the Indian traffic police. My friends from China keep asking me whether India can be defined as a conservative society. This is one of the most difficult questions for me to answer. As the local media frequently criticize the dowry system, the honour killings, the liquor culture and etc, even from the way most people dress, sometime I feel that India is conservative. But then I also notice that bold perfume advertisements and Bollywood videos are shown on the TV channels, sexy pictures are published in newspapers and magazines, something rarely seen in the so-called comparatively open-minded society in China. Indian youth are much more confident today. “The future of a nation always rests on the shoulders of its youth.” In my perspective, this is being proved by India’s youth. Showing greater interest in the growth and development of the country by getting involved in Indian politics, the government sector, business, software and initiating various innovative projects for the country’s welfare, the difference and change is quite visible. And there is bound to be progress in a country where the youth take the initiative. There is no doubt that Indian youth is setting examples and they are proving themselves in every field, at home and abroad. Doing interviews are not so difficult in India, because this is a country in which people like to talk and express themselves. At seminars and press conferences, the persons who ask questions is more likely to talk much more than those who answer. Actually, they just want to express themselves instead of asking and waiting for an answer. The Indian media plays a very important role. But in international politics, sometimes, I do not believe it plays a positive role, for example, it unnecessarily hyped tension with Pakistan after Osama Bin Laden’s killing. I believe that the win-win situation of Sino-India relationship can be achieved. Although I hold a positive stand on this trend, the fact is that many sensitive factors still exert negative influence on that. Some Indian experts say that apart from economic cooperation and trade volume increase, no other important achievements have been achieved for these years. I do not agree with that. In my perspective, the economic cooperation is pushing the exchange of people and mutual understanding. We can see that more and more people are travelling to each other’s country. As emerging markets, India and China do have many common interests; they attract many investments and create many wonders. As for the two countries comprehensive national strength is on the increase, but the US will continue to dominate international politics. That aspect should change as early as possible. July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |29|
INFOCUS | COVER STORY | MEDIA | VOICES
No access to Chinese officials Ananth Krishnan The Hindu’s Correspondent based in Beijing
I
wouldn’t say the media are hostile in their coverage. It is my perception that the coverage in both countries generally tends to reflect the tone of the relationship between the governments. Media coverage might magnify – and on occasion exaggerate – differences or problems. But I would still suggest that the coverage tends to be more a reflection of the nature of the relationship rather than any hostility created by the media. It’s fair to say that national interests do indeed influence coverage in both countries. This is clearly more so the case in China, where the media is largely State-controlled and not free when it comes to reporting on diplomacy. Yes, the Chinese media is opening up when it comes to local issues, but it is my perception that coverage is strictly dictated to when it comes to reporting on China’s relations with other countries. Unlike in India, you will rarely find contrarian views in newspapers, say, criticising foreign policy towards India. In India’s case too, Indian interests are more represented in covering issues. I see two reasons. Firstly, I’d say this is true – and somewhat natural - of media in any country, whether India, China or the United States – you tend to be informed more by the views of the government of your own country, and you tend to engage with officials of your country’s government more. A second – and particular – problem in our re-
Pakistan is a factor
Indrani Bagchi
I
Diplomatic Editor, Times of India
think on the Indian side, media coverage of China in the past couple of years has unfortunately been somewhat negative. That has more to do with the stories of incursions by the Chinese into Indian Territory in 2008-09, a perception that China does not want India to advance in the world. China’s relationship with Pakistan is seen as a big negative in India, because by and large the media interpret this as being directed against India. On the other hand, there is a great deal of appreciation at the progress that China has achieved in such a short time, a call to the Indian government to show greater efficiency as we see in the Chinese system. Fundamentally, Indian media coverage of China is a result of ignorance of the Chinese system, and the way it works. Therefore most Indian media see China through the prism of the western media. |30| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
porting on issues dealing with China is we have little – or no – access to the views of Chinese officials and how they see issues or problems. Chinese officials tend to not engage with foreign media beyond official statements, making it difficult to convey their viewpoints with the clarity with which we understand and report on the Indian government’s views on an issue. The “negative coverage” reflects problems and differences in the relationship which do exist. It doesn’t make sense to suggest that because there is some cooperation, the other issues are not reported on. Cooperation between the two governments also receives coverage. A case in point: cooperation between India and China on climate change received much attention in the media in both countries. So does cooperation under multilateral platforms like BRICS etc. Another example: the trade relationship is also widely reported on. Looking at trade and business coverage, I’d say it’s unfair to sweepingly label media coverage as “negative.” I don’t really see the Indian case as being any different from what’s happening elsewhere. Perhaps the United States is an exception in terms of how is China reaching out – I think China is far more interested in engaging with the US media considering the importance of its relationship with the US and is hence devoting more attention and resources there. I don’t think there’s any comparable move to engage with the Indian media only because China – and the Chinese media - view its relations with India as being far less important, and hence relations with India tend to receive far less attention. The two countries have only been actively engaging since the late 1980s, and substantial contact regarding education, commerce or the media has only been evident in the last decade. It will take continued engagement on many platforms – and time – for any unwarranted suspicious to subside, which ultimately also depends on the state of relations between both governments. India and China do indeed share a complex relationship. Having said that, these so-called “national interests” do not triumph over general reporting. Indian media is often much more critical of the Indian establishment than the Chinese. Yes, to some extent geo-politics do impact media coverage. When the media covers any issue related to China, it’s mainly related to foreign policy, so yes, geo-political interests do get mentioned in some length. Pakistan is certainly a factor. But it’s also true that the Chinese government makes little effort to push the “good” stories in the Indian media. The US has little influence on Indian media reporting on China, but because Indian media get a far greater exposure to US media, that has some effect on Indian reporting. That’s primarily because Indian media has a long independent tradition. Also it’s in the private sector, which might make it more difficult for the Chinese system to influence. On the other hand, it doesn’t seem like the Chinese too are particularly interested in wooing Indian media. I guess suspician about each other has to do with our collective history, the 1962 war when India lost, and China’s Pakistan connection. China is also felt to be encircling India that makes people nervous. Given the situation and context, India and China are more likely to end up at opposite ends. But there will be greater cooperation between India and China on many many issues.
Faulty perceptions to blame Pramitpal Chaudhuri
Foreign Editor, Hindustan Times
C
overage has been more negative the past two to three years because the primary issues between the two countries in these periods have been confrontational or dispute-based. If national interests mean government-based concerns, then there is only a minimal influence on the Indian media’s coverage. If anything, the Indian government has often sought to dampen controversies. This is less clear in China where the media is tightly controlled by the government. Media, or oped pages, like to have stories that revolve around rivalries and conflicts. The Western press, in fact, has been at the forefront of claiming there is an India-China race for resources and influence around the world. That has now been picked up by the media of both India and China. The reality is that there is far less of a race than people imagine, but it continues to serve as a backdrop for some reporting and oped pieces. China, I would argue, has the following negative image perceptions. One is that its unflinching support for Pakistan, which seems to be impinging on core Indian interests like
India not a big story for China Reshma Patil Beijing Correspondent for Hindustan Times
H
ostile coverage is a perception maintained on the Chinese side which tends to sweep all Indian media reports on China into the ‘negative’ category. New Delhi officials actually speak up in defense of India’s independent press when the Chinese raise this complaint. Indian media reports a variety of views and news breaks on the India-China story including both the highs and lows in bilateral relations. In fact, positive outcomes after bilateral meetings get better play and analysis in the media in India than the cursory coverage in China. The Indian media also follows up the China market, economy and culture – similar trends from emerging India are rarely reported in China. India is still not a big media story for China. The staterun Chinese media has kept major issues raised by New Delhi, like stapled visas for Kashmir residents, out of coverage. Most Chinese citizens have not even heard of these issues. This
Kashmir, has led it to be conflated with the negative Indian image of Pakistan. Two, China is either hostile or indifferent to certain Indian international aspirations including nuclear technology parity and UN Security Council membership. Finally, it is perceived as an efficient but brutal state in its treatment of dissidents, the Dalai Lama and so on. I don’t think China took India seriously until perhaps a year or two ago. Anti-Indian sentiment in China revolves around a belief that India is becoming part of an anti-China geopolitical alliance that includes the US and Japan. Thus it is seen as a subset of China’s US policy. But as China develops a larger stake in the Indian economy it seems to be more concerned about its image. Companies like Huawei have begun investing in public relations with some success. Not so the Chinese state. Indian and Chinese political leadership have been suspicious of each other since the 1950s for various ideological and security reasons. The public in India and China are barely conscious of each other. There is little civil society engagement between the two countries. Understandably the discourse is largely driven by state perceptions. The civilisational bond, I should add, is less than is often described – it does not go much beyond Buddhism. The coming together of the two Asian giants could shift global power equation.When the two have cooperated, as happened in Copenhagen’s climate summit, the Western powers were stymied. However, given the lack of trust between the two Asian giants their strategic coming together is highly unlikely. control of information has led Chinese citizens to assume that problems in the bilateral relationship are only because of Indian hostility/suspicions and the ‘negative’ Indian media. If you scrutinise Hindutan Times reports over the last three years, you will notice that we ensure there are Chinese voices in all our foreign policy stories related to India-China relations. It’s important to note that the Chinese government ministries and several strategic think-tanks make it extremely challenging to report their view. Government ministries remain closed to the foreign media. China needs to open up and enable a dialogue with its policymakers and military strategists in the foreign media...not just at rare official events, but by starting to acknowledge and respond to repeated interview requests. In the case of Chinese state-run media the editorials are an indicator of the government’s line of thinking on foreign policy. There are existing unresolved disputes on both sides. There is also an absence of information sources on India in the Chinese language. China has the world’s largest online population that mostly surfs Chinese language websites and they do not read Indian websites unless translations are produced in the Chinese media. Language and cultural differences are the main barriers to tourism and even doing business in either economy. But the prospect of coming together has greater business and economic potential. However, long-term political relations between India and China are hard to predict. July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |31|
INFOCUS | COVER STORY | MEDIA | VOICES
Need to negate propaganda Sreemati Chakrabarti
Honorary Director, Institute of Chinese Studies, New Delhi
N
egative reporting gets more readership/viewership as it conforms to people’s perceptions which have emerged due to many years of hostile propaganda against each other in both the countries. National interest is a very loosely-defined and unclear and confusing term but nationalism in both countries manifests itself more in the form of jingoism than patriotism. The media is not really bothered about ‘national interest.’ Increasing antagonism with a neighbour is in no way conducive to national interest. Objective reporting often does not bring in much revenue as media houses are in a stiff competition with each other to sell sensational news. “Geo-political rivals” is a favourite term of the media and elements who would want the mutual threat perceptions to grow as it benefits the world’s armaments industry. Here I will repeat what PM Manmohan Singh has said:”There is enough space in the world for India and China to grow.” The two terms (regarding Central Asia used by India and China) in my opinion are not necessarily conflictual. Let’s not forget that we are talking about states that are independent and sovereign. Nei-
Need for more peopleto-people contact
Vinod Sharma
Political Editor, Hindustan Times
T
here is most certainly an element of distrust if not outright hostility in the Indian media towards China with exceptions such as The Hindu. The reasons are both historical and contemporary. The two countries have been at war in the past and China has always backed Pakistan in its one-upmanship game vis-à-vis India. It has exchanged nuclear know-how with Pakistan and is also setting up nuclear power plants in that country. The Chinese position on Kashmir too is pro-Pakistan barring occasions when Beijing advised Islamabad to try and make progress on less contentious issues with New Delhi and leave Kashmir for the long haul. The Indian media and their Chinese counterpart also keep propagating stereotypes. This is largely on account of the language barrier and bare minimum peopleto-people contact between the two sides. Objective assessment of the complex relationship is a casualty largely because of lack of adequate study and knowledge on the part of commenta|32| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
ther India nor China is forcing them into a relationship. Pakistan and US are both important factors but not so important as to keep India and China apart forever. The media exaggerates these issues for it sells well. Chinese think tanks working on India do understand that India is too independent a nation to be dictated by the US despite the civilian nuclear deal and Indians who profoundly study and understand China know China’s compulsions in making positive noises in favour of its “all weather friend” – Pakistan. I do not agree with the view that China controls a lot of the media outside its borders. The western media is constantly pointing to China as a threat, and India as a counterweight to China. Such perceptions need to be contested. Nearly half a century of intense propaganda against each other has led to suspicion and threat. In case of China, antiIndia sentiments among the common people developed since colonial times when the British used Indians as security guards in the areas under colonial control (called Concessions) to harass and torture the local people. (See Madhavi Thampi, Indians in China: 1840-1949). No one is to benefit from an Asia-US/West Cold War. The world has never been as interdependent as it is today. Desire for economic growth and prosperity should lead to cooperation rather than confrontation within Asia and between Asian nations and others. The world is not completely uni-polar. China has emerged as America’s banker and India is at least a partial employer. Of course, the US may not appear to be as powerful as it was when the Soviet Union declined but its military power, as well as soft power, continue to enjoy the number one spot. tors and media persons – barring sinologists who have spent a lifetime studying the relationship. The Indian view of China is also guided by the pro-Capital media’s bias towards communist parties, notably the CPI-M that have been their whipping boys since the advent of economic reforms. The Indian media is driven also by TRPs that get better with Pak and China bashing on nationalist lines. This trend is complimented by the Chinese response – in their official newspapers and the cyber world. The India leadership has often insisted that there is enough space for China and India to compete and coexist. And if the balance of power has to shift to Asia in economic and strategic terms, these two must desist from unbridled rivalry. But such emotions do not translate into creating a popular psyche that’s realistic. The Indian middle class is distrustful of China and the Chinese people arrogant and equally distrustful of India. These perceptions are reinforced on a daily basis by a reactionary media and the ideologically biased Indian right wing bedazzled by the US and the West. Both Pakistan and the US are factors that influence the relationship. The Indian media admires China’s success on the economic front. Trust is lacking because of adversarial perceptions. We are so near and yet so far, emotionally, diplomatically, socially and in strategic terms. The Chinese perceive us as allies of the US and we view China as a country determined to check our matching rise by propping up Pakistan. India and China have to work in unison towards the creation of a multi-polar world. That would require a paradigm shift in the way we see each other.
Lack of trust Shams Raza Naqvi
Business Correspondent, News X
I
think more than negative, adequate coverage is not just there. As a business correspondent for my TV channel, many a times there is a story that I would want to do objectively. But on paper it’s far away from that and eventually the story is not done. Mostly what we cover on both sides are political stories and don’t really go beyond that. Trade and sports for example are not given enough importance. I also feel that it’s unfair to compare both sides as China is very secretive about figures unlike India which is fairly transparent. I think national interests do influence media coverage. I think each set of neighbours share complex relation. More so in South Asia where conflicts have been going on for decades with countries claiming each other’s territories. Tibet also has been a big factor and that is where China we all know is not too happy with India, especially with Dalai Lama being a state guest. Plus there is the Pakistan as well as Nepal (Maoist) influence on China and that makes India uncomfortable. Therefore the amount of confidence between the two countries is not there and hence the un-objective reporting, so to say. There’s only to a certain extent the media can go against the state. And if the state has unhealthy relations against a country only a minority of the media will contribute in improving those relations. In communist China that almost seems an impossible task. The media has to tow the line of the
Geo-politics impact coverage Vinod Khanna
Former Ambassador of India
I
t is true that the media coverage in both the countries generally tend to be negative about the other. I would however like to say that this happens largely on issues where interests of the two countries are perceived by the media to clash. On issues where cooperation is involved, — for instance in multinational forums — there is fairly objective reporting.
government. But what can bring us together are our rapidly growing economies. The world talks about India and China in the same breath, and there is enough scope for both to grow around the world at their own pace. Indian media’s reporting of China’s growing economy in a sense is a catalyst for India to follow and try and grow even faster. Absolutely! Both of Pakistan and the US are big factors. Two of the biggest growing economies cannot ignore each other and need to stay in touch. But as we’ve seen several times across the world politics takes over everything else. Many believe an unstable neighbour is not good for a country. Both India and China know that they’re too strong to be destabilized. But media loves negative reporting. And that is true for places beyond China. I’m not too sure about China influencing media anywhere, leave alone India. It’s very difficult to influence media anyways. And to do that China has to open up, let people inside and know more about the country. Indian journalists still can’t go to Lhasa and even going to China is not an easy task. In comparison many correspondents of China based media live and work from New Delhi. And that’s the difference. China has time and again claimed ownership of Indian land. Be it Ladakh, Arunachal or Sikkim. The areas are controlled by India where Indians live. So what is the point of raking up an issue every few months? It calls residents of Kashmir and Arunachal as their own and issues them stapled visas. It’s got half of Ladakh under its control. Chinese boats roam freely in Indian lakes in Ladakh. India doesn’t do anything of that sort. And therefore, the suspicion. What happened thousands of years ago, cannot form borders now. India and China have to come together to take on the world. And then they would be unbeatable. The power equation will definitely see a shift. The two Asian giants can take on the might of the west and the east and make South and Central Asia the powerful regions in the world. Remember money is power!! Occasionally, Mr N. Ram writing for the Hindu, on subjects like the internal developments in Tibet is, one is tempted to say, even excessively “positive!” On the question of “national interests” skewing objective reporting, I would say it seems so. But I must hasten to add that this is not true of just India and China. After all geo-politics inevitably has an impact on any country’s perceptions of its national interests. On the Pakistan and US factors, I would point out that Sino-Pak relations certainly influence the Indian media and to some extent the Chinese are unhappy with what they perceive as the anti China potential of Indo-US relationship. The 1962 War and the unresolved territorial dispute, Tibet and other geopolitical issues have contributed to both being suspicious of each other. Global power equations are changing somewhat but I don’t see a strategic alliance between China and India against the US, that is unlikely. Of course on some specific issues Indian and Chinese interests will converge and they may combine — along with other similarly placed countries — to oppose the US. July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |33|
INFOCUS | COVER STORY | MEDIA | INTERVIEW
Media must not lose its soul Immediately after his birth in April 1929 in Malaya, Tan Chung was carried by his mother and aunt to Shantiniketan in Bengal to be shown to his father and scholar Prof. Tan Yunshan. Rabindranath Tagore was glad to see the baby and christened him Asoka — the Bengali name Tan Chung could unfortunately never use. Tan Chung returned to Malaya with his mother. He was then raised in China from 1931 to 1954. He came to India to be united with his parents and studied at Shantiniketan from 1955 to 1958. He then started his career teaching Chinese language in India from 1958. An authority on history, Prof. Tan Chung has been a doyen of Chinese cultural studies in India for more than half a century. He is an authority on Chinese history, Sino-Indian relations and cultural exchange. In 2010, he was awarded the Padma Bhushan, the third highest civilian honour by the Indian government and the ChinaIndia Friendship Award by the Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao the same year. Prof Tan Chung is at present an Academic Associate at the University of Chicago and Emeritus Member of the Institute of Chinese Studies in New Delhi. ICC caught up with the professor to understand his views on the prickly media issue.
|24| India-China Chronicle  July-August 2011
Having scanned some of the major dailies of both countries over the past year, one gets the impression that media coverage is largely negative. Why so? Are the media in India and China generally hostile in their coverage? Or is it just a perception? I think it somewhat inaccurate in describing the mutual media coverage between India and China as ‘largely negative.’ First of all, the coverage is standard and normal, featuring what has happened between two fast developing economies and rapidly changing and modernizing societies. Second, one does not see an intentional distortion of facts as sometimes happens between the media of hostile countries. Of course, we see in the media in the two countries a reflection of some suspicion and misconception which is quite normal as too much have been happening in the two countries and too few experts are there to give a timely interpretation with correct perspectives. Subjectively, the media today are motivated by sensation-making rather than conscience-friendly and morality-responsible. Those of us who are dedicated to the promotion of India-China contacts and interconnections, friendship and understanding should not be distracted and disheartened by the cacophony of the media which is what the media are cut out for. It is true that India and China share a complex relation yet should there not be an objective assessment of the realities? Does so-called “national interests” prevail over objective reporting? I think we need a historical perspective to talk about this. India and China are the only two ‘civilization states,’ i.e. continuously burning flames of civilization for many millennia “where it was first lighted,” as described by Rabindranath Tagore. This fact should not be forgotten. However, as modern states, — the People’s Republic of China was born in 1949, and the Republic of India, in 1950 — they have been greeted by the
geopolitical paradigm of the world of the ‘nation states’ no sooner than they opened their eyes for the first time. Tagore’s vision of India and China being united in the geo-civilizational paradigm did influence India’s founder-prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru. Yet, when Nehru, with the good wishes of Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai, tried to place India-China relations right in the geo-civilizational paradigm, he met strong resistance from his detractors both at home and abroad who considered the geopolitical paradigm of the world of the ‘nation states’ sacrosanct and non-negotiable. Nehru could not do anything, and he died a sad and disillusioned man. Let me quote what Nehru wrote to Prof Tan Yun-shan (my father)
dated April 10, 1938: “China and India have stood for certain ideals in human life for ages past…I trust that it may be given to our two countries to cooperate together in the cause of world peace and freedom and that neither of us, in good fortune or ill fortune, will lose our souls in the pursuit of some temporary advantages.” As civilization states, India and China should be guided by their “souls” (the public good of mankind) which, I think, does not exclude their ‘national interests.’ Today, from the politicians to the masses in both the countries, there is no clear understanding about the real ‘national interests’ of the two civilization states of India and China. The people, as well as the media of the two countries must stand aloof from the “pursuit of
Of course, we see in the media in the two countries a reflection of some suspicion and misconception which is quite normal as too much have been happening in the two countries and too few experts are there to give a timely interpretation with correct perspectives. July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |25|
INFOCUS | COVER STORY | MEDIA | INTERVIEW
some temporary advantages” without losing their souls, as advised by Nehru. India and China are two geopolitical rivals and their interests clash both in the political and economic arena. Both are vying for the same markets. India calls the Central Asian region its ‘extended neighborhood’ while to China it is the ‘strategic backyard.’ Do the compulsions of geo-politics have an impact on the media too? Neighbouring countries are rivals of competition and even potential enemies according to the geopolitical paradigm of the world of the ‘nation states.’ This is the cancer of the modern world dominated by the Western civilizational influence. We should be reminded of the fact that in ancient times all great civilizations in the Western Hemisphere treated each other as rivals and bent on destroying one another. In the Eastern Hemisphere, the two neighbouring civilizations of India and China have maintained thousands of years of cordiality and fraternity in the spiritual arena of the geo-civilizational paradigm. India and China need not fall into the trap of the geopolitical paradigm, and need not be rivals, and their interests need not clash in the political and economic arena. Even modern thinkers of the Western civilization see the countries of today in an interdependent equation. International relations are refreshingly viewed as different modes of interconnection and intercourse. If any Indian calls Central Asia an ‘extended neighbourhood,’ he/she must be living in the 19th century Europe when ‘Might was Right’ and a patriot’s duty was to carry the ‘White Man’s Burden.’ But, the days of the ‘Sun-neversets’ Empire are gone, the days of ‘Superpowers’ are gone. My observations for more than half a century have not shown any proof that the intellectual mindset in India and China fits in the proposition suggested in your question. I don’t think the media of both countries are in similar preoccupation.
The two countries have known to cooperate at the governmentto-government level as well as on international forums. Then why is there negative media coverage? Is Pakistan a factor? Or the US! The answer to the first part of the question (which, I feel, is not properly framed) has already been provided above. The US is a factor that can impact India-China relations both positively and negatively. However, that possibility is increasingly diminishing
Pakistan is a huge factor that impacts India-China relations which is a topic good enough for a dozen PhD dissertations. Briefly put, China, for the last 60 years, has had no single occasion to feel displeased with Pakistan, but has been constantly called upon to reciprocate the extra-warm initiatives from Islamabad
|26| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
both because of the decline of the US dominating influence over the world, and because of India and China having their own international forums, especially the BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (also the India-China-Russia tripartite dialogue at the track one i.e., the foreign ministers’ level and track one-and-half i.e., at the scholars’ level to which I had been associated when I was the co-chairperson of the Institute of Chinese Studies, Delhi) to help slowly construct a cooperative strategic partnership. Pakistan is a huge factor that impacts India-China relations which is a topic good enough for a dozen PhD dissertations. Briefly put, China, for the last 60 years, has had no single occasion to feel displeased with Pakistan, but has been constantly called upon to reciprocate the extrawarm initiatives from Islamabad (particularly its role in helping the secret visit of Henry Kissinger to Beijing to break the ice between China and the US). Today, when China realizes the importance of Sino-Indian friendship, she is morally bound not to ditch Pakistan, and not even make Pakistan feel that the friendship of India is greater than that of Pakistan. This Chinese position which is a kind of dilemma has not been understood in India. On the contrary, it is somewhat construed as an ‘anti-India’ gesture, or a strategy to contain India. I understand that at the official level, both India and China don’t feel easy to discuss this issue. While there is yet any Chinese scholar who is competent to analyse the issue convincingly, few Indian scholars and strategists are in a position to appreciate the Chinese dilemma while discussing it. In other words, objectively, it is the India-Pakistan enmity that holds the improvement of India-China cordiality and trust as hostage. China is moving quickly to influence media in many parts of the world – because information is power – how is that it has so far failed to influence the Indian media.
I do not see China moving quickly to control media in any part of the world outside her territory. This conclusion is predicated on the assumption that China has such a power of control which she does not. On the contrary, China has already felt that she has not been sufficiently appreciated and understood in foreign countries as well as in the international media. Many years ago, an editor of the Global Times in Beijing asked me why in spite of all her efforts, China was less appreciated and liked in the international circles than India was? My answer was that international appreciation and love would not emanate from the position of power. The pursuit of power could make others respect with fear but not respect with affection. In many respects, India looked weaker than China, but won greater appreciation, sympathy and love. I have not seen any sign of China trying to influence the Indian media. I think the Chinese have not been able to figure out what the Indian media are, especially why they have so many contradictory voices, why they criticize the Indian government so much, and why they go to such an extent to wash dirty linen in public (even the US media exercise certain self-censorship). The two countries share a civilization bond yet that has not transpired into positive response. Why are we too suspicious of each other? I think I have already spelled this out. Look at what we are doing presently! A Chinese and an Indian cannot conduct a dialogue in the language of China or India. When you publish this Q&A for the Indian readership, you probably do it only in English which is a foreign language to both India and China. Make no mistake that we do not live in globalization, but in Anglobalization. It is this Anglobalization (and this servitude to Anglobalization) that has made the Indian and Chinese civilizations irrelevant to modern sociopolitical, socio-economic,
Tagore was optimistic about the future of India and China when the two entities were in their weakest state. Tagore’s optimism was not unrelated to the fact that for two millennia before the 18th century India and China had been the most developed world on earth. geopolitical discourses in India and China. I think it not just a question of language, but a mindset, a mental orientation. If we don’t get rid of this servitude, we cannot have the paradigm shift — from the geopolitical paradigm to geocivilizational paradigm. We shall be condemned to mutual suspicious between India and China forever.
Since the fall of the Soviet Union, the world has largely been unipolar. Do you think that a strategic coming together of the two Asian giants could balance or even shift the global power equation? That the dismemberment of the Soviet Union was not the ‘end of history’ was sufficiently proved by the IT bubble and the ‘9/11’ tragedy. We are now in the post-Cold War and post-9/11 era to see clearly that the world is a big mess, not unipolar at all. I think the decline of the domination of the great powers of the Western Hemisphere can help us revolutionize our thinking— including our concept of the ‘Asian giants.’ Tagore said in 1916 in Japan about the civilization of India and China: “Though it may look feeble and small, judged by the standard of the mechanical power of modern days, yet like small seeds it still contains life and will sprout and grow, and spread its beneficent branches, producing flowers and fruits when its time comes and showers of grace descend upon it from heaven.” Tagore was optimistic about the future of India and China when the two entities were in their weakest state. Tagore’s optimism was not unrelated to the fact that for two millennia before the 18th century India and China had been the most developed world on earth. In my opinion, the strength of a country’s civilization fortifies its material development, not vice versa. It was the moral corruption that led to the downfall of the great powers in modern times. India and China should not aspire to become ‘giants’ or ‘superpowers’. They should come out of the vicious circle of rise and fall of great powers, but lead the world to the Indian ideal of vasudhaiva kutumbakam (the world as one family) and the Chinese ideal of shijie datong (the world in grand harmony). Yes, by coming together, India and China not only can benefit a lot themselves, but can create a more harmonious, equitable and happy mankind.
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |27|
INFOCUS | SURVEY | COVER STORY
Hostile Media
FOURTH COLUMNISTS Sustained effort by the two governments is the only long term solution to improved media ties.
|20| India-China Chronicle  January-February 2011
T
he Indian and Chinese media it would appear are at a state of constant war. Thus, when Indian Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh visited a string of African countries this May to improve relations and hammer out a string of business agreements, the Indian media hailed it as an offensive to counter China, which was seen as trying to conquer and dominate that part of the world. Similarly, when news of the Chinese building an oil terminal in Myanmar surfaced, it was interpreted as yet another Chinese attempt to encircle India. China’s funding of the Pakistani deep sea port at Gwadar has of course been a bugbear for many years now. Every report of China taking up a major project in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka or the Maldives sets the alarm bells ringing in India media establishments. The Chinese, it would seem, are coming to get us. In China too, the media is often hysterical when it comes to reporting on India. The many contentious issues between the two countries include Tibet, Arunachal border dispute, the stapled Visa issue, Kashmir, nuclear assistance to Pakistan and more recently the presence of Chinese troops in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. The Chinese media believes that the Indian government has secretly been helping secessionists (called split-ists in China) in Tibet and illegally holding on to Arunachal Pradesh. The Indians believe that China is hell bent on grabbing Indian territory through military means and has been helping Pakistan in order to keep Indian ambitions in check. There can be no denying the media hostility. One commentator, writing in the Left wing Indian weekly Mainstream, protested: “The language used to describe India-China bilateral relations by the media of the two countries is so very different that one sometimes wonders if they are talking of the same thing. The Indian media has been suggesting that whatever activities China was conducting around were dangerous and detrimental to India.” The Chinese have often voiced their discomfort with the Indian media. Wang Hui writing in the China Daily warned that “the Indian side needs to show real sincerity in forging a more friendly relationship with China. An “Asia century” will remain only a dream until the two Asian giants can treat each other with mutual trust and respect.” Prof Hu Shisheng, the Deputy Director of the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, speaking at Columbia University in the United States, placed the blame of poor relations “mainly on Indian shoulders, pointing to Indian fears of China’s growing power and
influence as the root of the trust deficit between the two countries. “China is perceived negatively by people in India,” he said. “While there is contact and dialogue at the higher levels, there is very limited people-to-people cooperation,” Hu explained. This, according to him, has led to a heightened sense of fear and insecurity among the people of India. He also said that while the Chinese media rarely reports on India, Indian media regularly depicts China in a negative manner, and this has contributed to their fear and insecurity.” Even Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao expressed his displeasure of the Indian media during his New Delhi visit in December last year. He appeared particularly perturbed by Indian press reports on the visit’s failure to arrive on any breakthrough in the border disputes. Wen said that “not a single shot had been fired” nor had there been any “exchanges in border areas” between the troops.
Indranil Banerjie is an independent political and security risk analyst
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |21|
INFOCUS | COVER STORY | MEDIA
An Indian news agency quoted him as having said the boundary question has “repeatedly been sensationalized” by the media after which leaders of the two countries have had to “repair the damage and harm.” He exhorted the media to play a more active role in enhancing friendship. “A good neighbour is a blessing. We must be good neighbours,” Wen stressed.
While the negative aspects of the relationship cannot be wished away, protracted focus on the more positive aspects would eventually pave the way for a more balanced and moderated media view
Rising Nationalism The cause of bad press in both countries is suspicion that essentially stems from rising nationalistic sentiments in both countries coupled with a huge perception gap. Both countries have a painful colonial past, which colours their perceptions. The colonial baggage has not only bad memories but lingering geopolitical legacies. In both countries, the emerging middle class has rediscovered pride in their national achievements and some of this has translated into unbridled nationalism and suspicion of foreign intent. The elite in both countries believe the other is depriving them of territory that rightfully belongs to them. This is the root of the problem. Its effects are manifold. Security analyst B. Raman has written extensively on the mutual distrust between the media of the two countries. In one article, he elucidated on the causes of the mistrust, attributing them to three factors: “The lack of transparency about the Chinese media and the widespread perception in India that the Chinese media is still largely owned and/or controlled by the Chinese Government and the Communist Party of China. As a result, anything critical of India appearing in the Chinese media was viewed by large sections of the Indian public as representing the views of the Chinese Government and party. “The lack of adequate knowledge in China about the free press that India has, barring some radio stations and TV channels run by the Government, there is hardly any government owned or controlled media in India. Large sections of the Chinese public opinion tend to think that the entire Indian media is owned and/or controlled by the Government and the political party in power as is the case in China. These sections tended to assume that whatever was carried by the Indian media had the approval of the Government. Large sections of the Indian public assumed that the negative coverage of India in the Chinese media was instigated by the Government and party, which may have been or may not have been a fact. “Many in India believe that the Internet in China is closely controlled by the Government
|22| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
and that the negative contents of the blogs have been allowed to appear by the Government. Otherwise, they would have been erased. Indian fears about China are, however, not without foundation. There are real underlying issues that fuel distrust. Mohan Guruswamy, Chairman of New Delhi’s Centre for Policy Alternatives, has often spoken about this. In one talk delivered at the Atlantic Council in Washington, he pointed out that “relations between these two neighbours have always been tenuous, riddled with contentious border issues and territorial claims, and made even more muddled by the lack of a clear historical record demarcating the borders. He indicated that the burgeoning border disputes, partly a result of the British Raj’s lack of setting clear borders, were exacerbated by China’s occupation of Lassa in 1962 and then by India’s retaliatory occupation of the Tawang region. Attempts to resolve these
border issues – from China’s package deal offer in 1986 to their revised proposal in 1988 – have proved unsuccessful, and now neither country is willing to further negotiate on their dispute.” The border dispute in particular has led to a military response from the Indian government, which has responded to Chinese improvements of military infrastructure in Tibet by raising two more mountain divisions, upgrading forward airbases and deploying advanced Sukhoi multirole aircraft in north east India. The Chinese media continues to refer to India’s Arunachal Pradesh as Southern Tibet and claims it is part of China. The other, more favourable aspects of the relationship are often forgotten or glossed over. While the border dispute continues to linger, both countries have restrained their militaries and on the international front the two have occasionally coordinated their stand. The language of joint declarations between the
two countries has been free of acrimony and each high level meeting has invariably produced tangible results in the form of agreements and joint mechanisms. These have helped facilitate trade, cultural and economic ties between the two countries at the practical level. Yet, these achievements are rarely highlighted. Pro-active Diplomacy The problem of poor media relations can only be solved by the governments of the two countries, more so because the cause of the problem lies in rising nationalism. Pro-active public diplomacy by Beijing and New Delhi holds the key to the future. A cue can be taken from improved academic relations between scholars of the two countries. Writing in the Chinese journal, Contemporary International Relations, May/ June 2008 published by the China Institutes
of Contemporary International Relations (CICIR), scholar Liu Qian, pointed out that “Academic exchanges between Indian and Chinese IR scholars and among Chinese IR scholars themselves have been institutionalized in recent years. In addition to various academic symposiums and conferences on India organized by some individual universities and research institutions, there has been the annual conference on South Asia Studies hosted by the Chinese Association for South Asian Studies, the nation’s largest research organization for the study of the region. To date, IR scholars from China and India have engaged in three roundtable meetings on Sino-Indian relations. As mentioned above, the results of all these research efforts are represented by more than 20 books and 2,000 research papers on India published by Chinese IR scholars since 1994. A large number of these papers can be found in Contemporary
International Relations, Contemporary Asia & Pacific Region, South-Asian Studies and SouthAsian Studies Quarterly, the key national journals of international relations devoted to the study of India and the South Asian region.” This has happened largely due to institutional initiatives. While the negative aspects of the relationship cannot be wished away, protracted focus on the more positive aspects would eventually pave the way for a more balanced and moderated media view. A major focus could be on economic and business relations. The India-China two-way trade is roaring: from $270m in 1990, it has grown to $60 billion this year and is expected to touch a targeted $200 billion by 2015. Indians have not fully taken advantage of the business opportunities thrown up by China. Indian exports to China still tend to be composed largely of raw materials while imports are manufactured goods. This lopsided relationship can change with greater interaction between the two countries and more open information flows. The media’s role in this cannot but be critical. One Indian researcher has written about the low level of cultural interaction between the two countries. “There is a need to cultivate individual perceptions of the other, at the level of citizens. This exercise could be executed at the level of greater tourist facilitation measures or exposure to popular culture through mass media. More Indian television programmes, dubbed in Chinese, should be promoted in China (currently only a few such programmes are broadcast in China). Surprisingly, Chinese programming (similar to NHK, DW-Asia or Russia Today) is not even on offer on most satellite networks in India. Events such as the ‘Festival of India in China’ or the ‘Festival of China in India’ should be promoted on a wider scale to involve citizen participation beyond the diplomatic corps.” One problem is the low level of information and news flows between the two countries. Only a couple of Indian newspapers have correspondents in China and the same is true of the Chinese. The space devoted in the local media on developments in the other country is miniscule as well. There are few events and exchanges to promote media ties. The Chinese government, despite its bursting coffers, has no outreach programme comparable to that of the United States, Britain or France in India. The Indian government too does not consider it a priority to fund exchanges. All this must change, for, sustained effort by the two governments is the only long term solution to improved media ties.
while the Chinese media rarely reports on India, Indian media regularly depicts China in a negative manner, and this has contributed to their fear and insecurity
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |23|
INFOCUS | INDIA-CHINA | LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT
Grass with no roots Local governments in India and China
|10| India-China Chronicle  March-April 2011
Neither in China will harmony prevail, nor in India inclusive growth occur unless we have in both countries a much higher measure of people’s involvement in the building of their own lives. Mani Shankar Aiyar
L
ocal self-government in India is itself such a fascinating subject that one wonders about the need to examine the Indian model in comparison to the Chinese model, especially since there appears to be little in common between the origins of local government as an imperative of good governance in the two countries; the national political context in which the endeavour is being pursued; the purposes which are sought to be attained; and the long-term consequences that are likely to follow. Hence, less for comparison than for contrast, such an exercise might be attempted. While in India, the need for Panchayat Raj was articulated by Mahatma Gandhi on the eve of Independence in the context of democratising both the polity and society as the sine qua non for the empowerment of the weakest and the progress of the poorest, the origins of the present model of local government in China lie in a people’s response to the challenge of the anarchical conditions that prevailed in the wake of the chaos engendered by the Cultural Revolution and the high-level political decision to abandon collectivisation and communes as the path to rural resurgence. This proposition requires further elaboration. Asked about the “India of my Dreams,” Mahatma Gandhi summed up his vision for India after Independence in the following words: “I shall work for an India in which the poorest shall feel that it is their country, in whose making they have an effective voice.” Please note the stress on empowerment – “effective voice” – as the key to participative development, to ensuring that the poorest feel “it is their country.” Gandhiji went on to advocate elected village governments as the basis of all democracy – going
so far, indeed, as to suggest that there be no direct elections at any level other than the village level for he foresaw that the higher the level at which votes were sought, the larger the scope for muscle power and money power to de-legitimise the process. (And who can say he was wrong?!) So convinced was he of the need for what we now call “subsidiarity” that he advocated “village republics” – his phrase – where the village community would be empowered to look after virtually all its needs, with the ethical coda that development policy would be limited
the villagers of a small village in Anhui Province started an experiment among themselves with eighteen of the most enterprising and daring placing their thumb impressions on a pledge to organise themselves to meeting basic human needs rather than be driven by the mad scramble for more and more and yet more. Unsurprisingly, the less idealisticallydriven, more practical men of eminence (with a scattering of women) who constituted the Founding Fathers of our Constitution (there were few Founding Mothers) were unimpressed and since Gandhiji was, in any case, no longer around, conspired, overtly and covertly, to give his vision the quietus and get on with modern nationbuilding. Panchayat Raj was, thus, sidelined into a couple of lines in the (unenforceable) Directive Principles of State policy and firmly placed in the State List of Schedule VII as falling entirely within the jurisdiction of State legislatures, with the Centre having no role in promoting or even facilitating
local government. Yet, the seeds sown by Gandhiji’s far acuter perception of India’s basic requirements were to sprout within a decade. However, before we come to that, let us take a look at the origins of China’s current thrust to local government. Of course, like India, China too through the turbulent millennia of its highly sophisticated civilization and complex evolution to contemporary nationhood had had in place institutions of village governance that retained their essential character whatever the complexion of governance (or non-governance) at higher levels of State administration. In the decades preceding the Chinese communist revolution, it had, of course, been much more a period of non-governance than governance, and Chairman Mao seems to have been content to leave village administration much as it was in the initial decade after the Revolution while concentrating on installing altogether newer highly centralised and authoritarian single party governance at the Centre and in the Provinces. But once the Revolution was consolidated at the higher echelons of governance, he launched the programme of communes and collectivization which placed all power - political, social and economic - in the hands of Party cadres to the exclusion of all others. This led inexorably to the Cultural Revolution which traumatised the nation. After his death in 1976, China under Deng Xiaoping moved towards a radical reorganisation of both the polity and the economy (while retaining strict hegemony for the Party over all aspects of national life). In the anarchy that followed at the grassroots level where the extant systems of communes and collectives were being dismantled with no clear alternatives being put in place, the villagers of a small village in Anhui Province started an experiment among themselves with eighteen of the most enterprising and daring placing their
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |11|
INFOCUS | INDIA-CHINA | LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT
thumb impressions on a pledge to organise themselves for themselves, thus pioneering the Villagers’ Committee (note: not Village Committees) that constitute the foundation of the system that has now come to characterise local government in contemporary China. After concluding that the Anhui venture was worth replicating around the country, China initially introduced an Organic Law in 1987 permitting of a trial period to watch the working out of a systematic form of elected local government, principally among Party cadres and committed to continued Party dominance, but aimed at responding in some measure to the need for providing public goods and services to the people, which also provided employment and, more important, entrepreneurial opportunities for Party cadres and local units of the ubiquitous People’s Liberation Army. The system was spectacularly successful in certain key respects, although deeply disturbing in other respects – both of which we shall consider presently – but sufficiently encouraging for incorporation in China’s Constitution and the adoption of an Organic Law at the 16th Congress in 1998 to universalise the system. In India, rather than go down the path charted by Mahatma Gandhi, rural reconstruction and resurgence started with the top-down, bureaucraticallydriven Community Development Programme (CDP) which while revolutionary for its time fell well short
Only Empowerment will lead to Entitlements, and only Empowerment and Entitlements will together lead to Enrichment – the three Es to be achieved through the three Fs. Short of that happening, India will prosper but Indians will not of the participative democratic model of Gandhiji’s “India of my Dreams.” But as a precursor of what was to come, the CDP was both unprecedented and historic, perhaps the world’s first experiment in consciously fostering inclusive village development in consultation with and with the involvement of the local community. It also put in place an administrative legacy based on development “blocks” – as distinct from revenue circles – headed by Block Development Officers who, for their time, constituted a dramatic departure from the practices of colonial officialdom who concerned themselves mainly with land revenue collection – the mainstay of British India’s finances - and law and order, but not State-sponsored development. (The downside is that the new administrative structures and bureaucracy spawned by the CDP have since become a principal stumbling block in effectively realising
|12| India-China Chronicle March-April 2011
the goals of genuine Panchayat Raj. But we are running ahead of our story). While, therefore, the CDP was forging ahead and gaining kudos at both the national level and internationally, a Study Group was set up under the chairmanship of a renowned Gandhian, Balwantrai Mehta, whose Report in 1957 must rank as the decisive, pathbreaking moment in the endeavour for inclusive governance through grassroots democracy for grassroots development. Jawaharlal Nehru promptly proceeded to urge all States, all of whom were then under Congress governments (bar Kerala, which ironically has since become India’s premier Panchayat Raj state – “History has,” indeed, as T.S. Eliot said, “many cunning passages!”) to proceed full steam ahead towards legislating the Balwantrai Mehta model of local self-government and holding elections to duly empowered units of local self-governance. He himself lit the lamp of Panchayat Raj at Nagore in Rajasthan, the constituency headquarters of CDP Minister, S.K. Dey, on Gandhi Jayanti 1959, the birth anniversary of Mahatma Gandhi in fitting tribute to the intellectual, moral and spiritual fount of inclusive growth through inclusive governance in independent India. But with Pandit Nehru’s passing away in 1964, Panchayat Raj withered on the vine and was in a total state of disrepair when the first non-Congress national government in India, led by Morarji Desai, took office in 1977. An early step of this government was the constitution of the Asoka Mehta committee to look into issues of local self-government, but even as the Committee submitted its report two years later the Morarji government fell, yet not before the Committee recommended a Constitutional amendment to incorporate Panchayat Raj as a Constitutional and, hence, ineluctable imperative of our system of governance. Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi (1984-89) initially explored managerial measures to secure “responsive administration” as a principal goal of governance, but then concluded that managerial measures
would not do, that a root-and-branch systemic revolution was needed: that “responsive administration” could only be secured through “representative administration” which would be “responsible” to the community that elected it. To this end, the Asoka Mehta recommendation for Constitutional status, sanctity and sanction to democratically elected Panchayat Raj Institutions was revived and the draft Constitutional amendment prepared by L.M. Singhvi and annexed to the Asoka Mehta Committee report was elaborated and placed before Parliament on 15 May 1989, at about the same time as China started its trial experiments in their form of local government. (I had the privilege of being the Prime Minister’s principal points-man in drafting the Constitution amendment and later the country’s first Panchayat Raj minister). However, our amendment did not pass Parliamentary muster during Rajiv Gandhi’s term, but was subsequently passed, with some amendments, by Parliament in December 1992 virtually unanimously. At about the same time, the tentative Anhui experiment had blossomed over much of China and China started readying for its Constitutional amendment and the elaboration of its Organic Law. The two endeavours are, therefore, roughly comparable in time but the paths they are following are so different that it is contrast, as I said earlier, rather than comparison that brings out their respective characteristics. The most obvious difference is that local self-government in India is designed to reinforce our vibrant, multi-party democracy while China’s design principally results in reinforcing the one-Party nature of their State. Most candidates in Chinese local body elections are well recognised Party cadres and the voter’s choice is generally restricted to choosing between Party leaders rather than veering towards multiple choice based on ideological differentiation and alternative goals. Yet, while multiple choice among Party leaders in China at the local level does induce a greater measure of responsiveness to the local electorate in the interest of re-election,
even non-Party elections to the lowest tier of governance in India – the village panchayat – do tend to reinforce rather than undermine multi-party rivalry as the essence of our democracy. But precisely because of the interweaving of Party and Government in China, including at the County, Township and Villagers’ Committee levels, problems of devolution encountered in practice in India are hardly to be found in China. In consequence, local government in India tends to be more representative, but local government in China tends to be more effective. First, let us consider representativeness. In terms of the numbers entrusted with the responsibility of running local government, India and China are roughly comparable, the larger number in China reflecting the larger rural population, in absolute numbers, in that country. However, the number of village units is rather larger because China’s Villagers’ Committees tend to
The two endeavours are, therefore, roughly comparable in time but the paths they are following are so different that it is contrast, as I said earlier, rather than comparison that brings out their respective characteristics
represent single habitations, whereas in India State governments are free to bunch together habitations into a single village panchayat. While the rationale for this is that in densely populated areas, it makes functional sense to have larger village units, in practice the larger the village unit the wider is the spread between the electorate and the elected representative, the principal cause of the polity being permeated with what Rajiv Gandhi in his Congress centenary speech memorably called “the brokers of power.” On the other hand, village assemblies to whom the village panchayats and Villagers’ Committees are responsible tend to be far livelier in India than in China largely because the overall ethos in India is that of democratic debate rather than political conformity. Moreover, in the last few years, large village assemblies – Gram Sabhas, as the Indian Constitution designates them – are being supplemented by ward-level assemblies, which makes for more interactive consideration of village related issues and a less forbidding and less superficial forum of debate than large, unwieldy Gram Sabhas. Nevertheless, the liveliness and modalities of debate in India should not be overstressed because Chinese public opinion, especially at the local level, is becoming increasingly restive and learning the power of the ballot. Where India scores heavily over China in representativeness is with regard to gender empowerment and affirmative action in favour of the historically disadvantaged. Owing to reservations for women, pitched at
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |13|
INFOCUS | INDIA-CHINA | LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT
RADICAL REORGANISATION: China’s Deng Xiaoping
a minimum of 33% of both seats and posts, there are as many as 1.2 million women elected to local government institutions, about a million in rural areas and the rest in urban areas. Of these, about 86,000 are office bearers. Bihar, a state generally represented as being among the most socially backward in the country, has pioneered the innovation of raising the women’s share of assured seats to 50% (and actually electing close to 55% women to their local bodies as women are not obliged to contest only from reserved seats). Several other state governments followed suit and the ruling coalition at the Centre have now pledged themselves to a Constitutional amendment which will raise the share of assured women’s seats to 50%, thus raising the number of elected women representatives to nearly 2 million. There are, thus, more elected women in India alone than in the rest of the world put together; it amounts to gender empowerment in political and social terms on a scale which is without precedent in world history and without parallel in the contemporary world. Moreover, studies conducted in one state – Karnataka – have shown that, as against 33% reservations for Scheduled Tribe women within the share reserved for the Scheduled Tribes, the actual share of elected tribal women is nearly double at 65%; and the comparable figure for Scheduled
Caste women is of the order of 54%, thus signalling the fact that women’s empowerment through Panchayat Raj is far ahead in the depressed sections of society than among the swarn jaati, the caste elites that are often portrayed as the purveyors of elite capture of local government units in rural India. In sharp contrast, women’s empowerment through local government in China is tokenism at best – or, rather, at worst. Resisting the temptation to dwell at even greater length on women’s empowerment through Panchayat Raj, let me turn to affirmative action through the Panchayat system in favour of the historically disadvantaged – the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, so called because they are exhaustively listed in Schedules appended to the Constitution. While reservation of seats for the SC/ST in elected bodies has been a defining characteristic of Indian democracy since the pre-Independence elections of 1937, Panchayat Raj has been designed to reflect the social composition of the electorate at every level of the threetier panchayat system, with the share of SC/ST seat reservations being calibrated to the share of these sections of the population at each level of the electorate – village, intermediate and district. Reservations apply also to offices on a rotational basis. Moreover, for tribal areas listed in the Fifth Schedule to the Constitution, the Constitution mandates Parliament to pass legislation relating to Panchayat Raj in such areas. Accordingly, the Provisions of the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act were passed in 1996 and has entered the political discourse under the acronym PESA. The distinguishing feature of this crucial legislation is that it empowers Gram Sabhas in Fifth Schedule areas to “approve” plans, projects and programmes proposed by village panchayats as well as “authorise” the issue of “utilisation certificates,” the bureaucratic device – often misused – by which the bureaucracy is held responsible for expenditure. In no other area of governance is the authority to issue “utilization certificates” vested in the beneficiary community other than under PESA. Further, the Act
|14| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
provides for exclusive community control over minor forest produce and the right to be consulted in respect of the exploitation of minerals and other forest wealth, a powerful tool to resist social exploitation and displacement. But perhaps precisely because of its far-reaching, even revolutionary implications, it is principally the utter failure of the state governments concerned to faithfully and sincerely implement PESA, despite all of them having passed conformity legislation through their respective state legislatures, that is, in my view, responsible for a third of the districts of India being convulsed, partially or wholly, in armed insurgency in such tribal areas, ironically by partisans calling themselves “Maoists.” While parts of China have been classified as “minority areas” and given a fair measure of relative autonomy to manage their affairs, local government in China is not used as a tool of social engineering, as in India, to right historical wrongs. While, therefore, India scores over China on almost all dimensions of representativeness in local government, where China is far ahead of India is
ROOT-AND-BRANCH: India’s Rajiv Gandhi
in effectiveness. Under the Indian Constitution, Panchayat Raj being a state subject, State legislatures and, more importantly, state governments have been most reluctant to effectively devolve the three Fs – Functions, Finances and Functionaries – to the institutions of local self-government nor to mobilise the Panchayat Raj system for effective district planning as mandated by the Constitution. Democracy, being a game of numbers, there is an inexorable push from below for more genuine administrative and economic empowerment, but vested bureaucratic and state legislature interests are fighting a relentless rearguard action to delay, derail and defer devolution. Only in states where the political authority has demonstrated an over-riding political will to push Panchayat Raj has there been significant progress towards effective local self-government. The leader of the pack over the last decade and more has been Kerala, with Karnataka running a close second, and some others – West Bengal, Tripura, Sikkim, Madhya Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Rajasthan and Haryana – slowly catching up. But most others remain reluctant start-ups. The Central Government has also been woefully slow in using its immense financial clout to push for effective Panchayat Raj. More than 75% of all funding for anti-poverty and rural welfare expenditure comes from the Central budget. It is delivered through nearly a hundred or more “schemes” of the Central Ministries, each of whom – and, worse, each of which – set up their own respective silos, insulated from each other, to deliver Centrally legislated entitlements of public goods and services to the same set of beneficiaries: the poor. Notwithstanding explicit instructions issued in October 2004 at the instance of the Prime Minister to all Central Ministers to reorient their schemes to ensure the centrality of the panchayats in the planning and implementation of these schemes – and that too within three months not one Central scheme has thus far been effectively redesigned, Central Ministers and officials taking shelter behind the “may”, as distinct from the
BUILDING INDIA: Jawaharlal Nehru (left) with Mahatma Gandhi.
village assemblies and even individual villagers in China have far more meaningful access to their locally elected representative and the range of issues that can be taken up with these representatives is far wider. “shall” clause of the Constitution to say they are giving the State governments the “option” of resorting to Panchayat Raj Institutions but not obliging them to do so. Even the Planning Commission, notwithstanding its own circular of August 2006 insisting on district planning as provided for in Article 243G read with Article 243ZD as the foundation of all planning, has not withheld a paisa of Plan allocations for want of Panchayatbased district plans. The absence of any real political will on the part of the Centre to insist on effective Panchayat Raj has leached the Panchayat Raj system of effective devolution. All one is left dependent
on is the political will displayed by some states. There is, thus, unlike in China no element of uniformity in the administrative and economic empowerment of the institutions of local government. The one ray of hope is that the recommendations of the Thirteenth Finance Commission, tabled in Parliament a fortnight ago, provide in principle for massive and assured transfers of sizeable funds for “non- Plan”, that is, maintenance and other revenue expenditure. If only the Planning Commission in its forthcoming mid-term review of the Eleventh Five-Year Plan were to follow in the footsteps of the Finance Commission, genuine Panchayat Raj might still be achieved within a generation – 25 years – of the entry into force in April/May 1993 of the relevant provisions of the Constitution: the deadline set by Rajiv Gandhi for himself. Whether this happens or not depends very much on the sincerity with which the Government takes the Prime Minister’s injunction of January 2009 that “Inclusive Growth is not possible without Inclusive Governance,” an affirmation not repeated since then although “Inclusive Growth” remains the arch-stone of the Eleventh Plan.
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |15|
INFOCUS | INDIA-CHINA | LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT
Indeed, it is disturbing to see the dismissive tone of the Government with regard to the shocking finding of the UNDP in its latest Human Development report, released in India last October (ironically by the Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission himself – history’s “cunning passages” never cease!) that over the last fifteen years, during which anti-poverty and rural welfare/development spending by the Centre has risen fifteen times, India’s relative ranking on the UN Human Development Index has risen from 132 to – well – 132! Outcomes are clearly totally noncommensurate
In sharp, even startling contrast to India’s painfully slow and uneven experience of devolution over close to two decades of governance reform, a period almost equally coincidental with the much-vaunted economic reforms process, China’s local government system has been, and continues to be, far more intimately involved with rural development, rural welfare, and catering to the basic minimum needs of the people. The reasons for this are manifold and I will attempt to briefly outline these. First, autonomy of finances. While China has a system of grants from
with outlays. And yet there is little commitment to a radical systemic overhauling of the delivery system to make local bodies responsible for the delivery to their communities of the community’s entitlements of public goods and services. Only Empowerment will lead to Entitlements, and only Empowerment and Entitlements will together lead to Enrichment – the three Es to be achieved through the three Fs. Short of that happening, India will prosper but Indians will not. And accelerated growth, with its inevitable concomitant of accelerating disparities, could destabilise our entire democratic framework – India’s single greatest achievement since Independence – as it has already begun doing in a third of our insurgency-ridden districts.
the Centre or the Provinces to the local bodies, with the proportion of such grants to locally raised revenues rising in inverse proportion to the degree of development and per capita incomes in the Province, county or even village concerned, from the early beginnings of the local governance reforms process in China, and harking back to the earlier communist practice over the decades since the Revolution, one of the principal responsibilities of local bodies has been revenue raising, partly to defray their own expenses but substantially to meet the revenue expectations of higher local authorities from the Townships to the Counties and even to the Provinces and the Centre. Only in Goa in India are the local bodies required to garner taxes
|16| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
which are then appropriated by the State government, often for expenditure by the State government itself or, more typically, through their MLAs, that is Members of the State Legislature, the Vidhan Sabha. The upside of the Chinese system of revenue collection is that local bodies in China have a much larger sphere of responsibilities than in most Indian States for the provision of public goods and services. Equally, village assemblies and even individual villagers in China have far more meaningful access to their locally elected representative and the range of issues that can be taken up with these representatives is far wider. In India, more often than not, the locally elected representative, the panch or the sarpanch, is no more than a conduit for channelling public grievances and public demands to the all-pervasive local bureaucracy or their respective MLAs or MPs, occasionally even the State Minister concerned. Thus, Panchayat Raj has manifested itself as primarily a grievance redressal mechanism in India while it is a functioning tier of government in China, particularly in the more prosperous counties and provinces. The downside is that local authorities in China, through an unholy nexus between the elected body, the local Party officials and the local bureaucracy, indulge in outrage levels of exactions, overt and covert, legal and illegal, to meet and exceed the targets of revenue collection set by higher authorities at the Central or Provincial level, the excesses committed on peasant farmers being one of the more notorious stories surfacing in the otherwise quite commendable story of local government in China. To an Indian, there is something weirdly reminiscent in this of the consequences of Lord Cornwallis’ 18th century Permanent Settlement that led to the horrors of zamindari, especially in Bengal, Bihar, the United Provinces (now Uttar Pradesh) and both halves of Punjab, the Indian and the Pakistani, as also Sind, now in Pakistan. Yet, in the strictly hierarchical, disciplined and authoritarian political regime that prevails in China, there is little alternative to compliance.
Moreover, “mandates” are received from above as to what is expected of local bodes, distorting local development priorities. More often than not, the contribution of local officials and elected representatives (almost all of whom are ambitious Party workers anxious for preferment to higher echelons of authority) is measured on the sole criterion of their tangible contribution to birth control, graphic posters of birth control devices being rather more in evidence in local government establishments than local development priorities (as I saw a couple of years ago on a visit to villages around picturesque Dali in Kunmin Province). This means that in practice local bodies in China function primarily as implementing agencies of higherlevel policies and programmes rather than as autonomous, communitycontrolled and community-responsive institutions of local self-government. Local government in China is thus reduced for much of their working time to the role played by local bodies in India, that is, as implementing and propaganda agencies than as institutions of local self-government, as mandated in Article 243G of the Indian Constitution. It also means that local bodies, especially in the more prosperous coastal regions of China, are vehicles for profiteering in the interest of the local elites, generally Party or PLAbased, that have captured and dominate the local bodies. On the other hand, the unleashing of the animal spirits of market socialism has primarily taken place through the highly entrepreneurial Township and Village Enterprises established by the local bodies that has decisively contributed to the astonishing and rapid rise of China as the manufacturing hub of the global economy. Recent studies, on the one hand and the difficulty in replicating the TVE model in areas distant from Special Economic Zones, indicate that it is perhaps more proximity to SEZs than any unique feature of Chinese local government autonomy that has linked local government in China with their staggeringly successful Industrial
Revolution, especially as ever increasing numbers of TVEs are converting to joint stock companies and even proprietorial concerns. But certainly in comparison with India’s Rural Business Hubs that were explicitly urged on local self-government and the Indian corporate sector by none less than the Prime Minister himself at the start of his first term as Prime Minister have been a dismal failure. I should know: I was the Minister in charge of this flop exercise! Where however the different paths of local government in China and India converge is in their significance
the Second World War, after the miracle of American Capitalism had, as John Kenneth Galbraith brilliantly demonstrated in his book of that name, shown the way to sustained progress in defiance of traditional gloomy business cycle theories much in the manner that the bumble bee flies whatever the laws of aerodynamics might say. Both in India and China, the Kuznetz thesis has consciously or unconsciously influenced the relentless pursuit of ever more sustained ever higher growth rates, the equity implications being sidelined in the much-vaunted belief that growth is
for future political and social stability in both countries, as also for continued economic progress. Simon Kuznetz had famously argued in his Presidential Address to the American Economics Association on 29 December 1954 that while widening inequalities of income and wealth were an inevitable concomitant of the growth process, this did not amount to the sacrifice of equity because growth is a tide that raises all boats, that everyone benefited from higher growth rates even if the higher the growth rate the wider the disparity. This comforting doctrine came at the end of two centuries of the Industrial Revolution in Britain, a century after the US economy had emerged as the largest in the world and, post the Great Depression and
good for everyone even if some are fast-tracked while the majority limp forward. The grassroots are, however, beginning to rumble. The rumbling is louder in India but discontent is all too visible in China too. In fact, subaltern India – the India of the jungles and the tribals – is even questioning the hitherto unchallenged axiom that Development is Desirable by postulating the alternative view – the grassroots view – that Development is Disruptive and disproportionately benefits the distant to the detriment of those who have traditionally lived on the land that is sought to be expropriated and exploited in the name of economic growth. To whom do the minerals and forest wealth belong? To the State, as argued
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |17|
INFOCUS | INDIA-CHINA | LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT
in colonial law and carried forward into independent India? Or, as the Indian Maoist insists, to the people of the forest? In less violent form and in less strident terms, the underclass in other parts of India has begun increasingly asking, “What’s in it for us”? What, indeed, is in it for 77% of Indians who, according to the unchallenged Arjun Sengupta Committee Report, presented to Parliament in 2007, based on 2004-05 figures, live on under Rs20 a day – two US dollars at Purchasing Power Parity? Are these 836 million Indians as enthused by India’s prospects
stagnation among the submerged seven-eighths? Karl Marx warned that those who forget their history will be compelled to relive it. History tells us that the big challenge to industrialization generally comes in the sixth to eighth decades after the start of the Industrial Revolution: from the mild manifestation of the Luddite Movement in England in the early nineteenth century to the barricades of Paris in 1832 so vividly described in Les Miserables by Victor Hugo to the “Spectre that is haunting Europe… Workers of the World Unite. You have nothing to lose but your chains. You
of economic superpowerdom within the life time of today’s youth as are the 259 million who, according to the same report, constitute India’s “middle and higher income” class? For the moment, India’s discontented are turning to the ballot rather than the bullet to vent their grievances: “antiincumbency” has become a peculiarly Indian word to describe the revolving door through which the electorate pushes out incumbent governments, and even more, incumbent legislators at every election – only to find, in the renowned Punjabi phrase, that “Natha Singh, Prem Singh/ One and the same thing!” How long before democracy itself is questioned as the root cause for
have a world to gain!” In Germany, it is the sixth decade after Bismarck created the Zollverien and sparked the Industrial Revolution in Central Europe that Adolf Hitler was hailed – or is it “heiled”? – by his people; it was at about the same time that Japan gave itself over to Admiral Tojo, the political and military face of the Zaibatsu; that Salazar, the professor of economics rescued Portugal from financial disaster only to grind it under his heel for the next fifty years; that Mussolini marched on Parliament from Milan; that Franco overthrew the Republicans. Let us be warned: Kuznets or no Kuznets, there is a political-economic reality in the making that threatens the
|18| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
continuation of our democracy. So also, in China. A Chinese labour relations friend of mine, at a UN conference in Bangkok a few years ago described the consequences of liberalisation and globalisation in his country as, “First, they make you landless; then they make you jobless; that leaves you homeless; and finally renders you hopeless.” In their hundreds of millions transiently unemployed Chinese trudge from railway station to railway station, bus stand to bus stand, while many hundreds of millions more languish in the countryside. The Chinese leadership has had the wisdom to proclaim “harmony” as the goal of all nation-building; we call it “Inclusive Growth.” But neither in China will harmony prevail, nor in India inclusive growth occur unless we have in both countries a much higher measure of people’s involvement in the building of their own lives. We have each had our achievements in this respect. Each of us too has put in place the basic structures needed for participative development. What we also both have is relatively empty cups waiting to be filled with the nectar of empowerment. If such empowerment comes their way, those deprived of the immediate benefits of growth might be prepared to wait a generation or two longer. But if even Empowerment to secure Entitlements is not to be their lot, there is a stirring beneath the surface which we must all list to. Else, our dreams may turn into delusions. We do not have the luxury of waiting for centuries, as happened in the West, for the poorest to get a modicum of material comfort; our people are more impatient, more demanding. And we have the means at hand – genuine local self government – to meet these rising expectations substantially. Would that we have the wisdom to use it.
Mani Shankar Aiyar is a former minister for panchayati raj. He is a Member of Parliament.
INFOCUS | INDIA-CHINA | BUSINESS
India and China doing business together
One size doesn’t fit all
They have to play with rules set by others yet there is hope that the two rising nations are likely to play to reinforce each other. S Jaishankar
T
he growth stories of India and China, impressive in recent years in their own right, have acquired an added sheen. Their paths of development have in many respects been unique. This means that they not only differ from the western experience but from each other as well. Certainly, they do share some similarity in their broad socio-economic goals and the
scale of change being attempted. As developing economies, they also possess competitive skills in their particular areas of competence. Where they do diverge is in their approach and processes. One is more statist, supply driven, collectivist and goal oriented. The other is more entrepreneurial, demand influenced, pluralistic and process focused. If scale is the key characteristic of China’s growth, frugality is the hallmark of
|6| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
India’s development. When scale meets frugality, this becomes the basis for a significant economic interaction. So, what is actually happening between India and China? While attention has been focused on the issues in the relationship, it is on the opportunity side that gains have been steadily recorded. Out of nowhere, within a decade, India has emerged among the top 10 trade partners of China. A turnover of less than USD
3 billion in 2000 looks set to cross the USD 60 billion level. What accounts for this rapid growth? As I noted, China’s large scale production capabilities are an increasingly effective fit for India’s ‘frugal’ economic growth. The intersection of price, delivery and quality is today truly a value proposition in a number of fields. As a result, for example, the category ‘electrical machinery’ accounts for 30% of Chinese exports and ‘machinery’ for 26%. In plain English, Indian companies are sourcing from China for power generation and telecom sectors, steel and non ferrous metallurgy, railways, mining and construction. In addition, they are also using Chinese components and costs to enhance their competitiveness in the domestic market for consumer goods. The intensely competitive nature of the Indian economy, with its heavy emphasis on pricing, has created a natural market for China. Two developments are of interest to the short term growth of Chinese exports to India. One, there is a stirring interest in the construction industry in India to take advantage of Chinese capabilities, just as their counterparts in power generation have done so successfully. Secondly, Chinese banks and financial institutions have started showing much greater attention to India’s economy. Some early steps taken in project financing also appear to augur well for the future. At present, there are no Chinese banks in India and limited experience in dealing with Indian companies. That could change rapidly, particularly once an inter-Governmental understanding on banking is concluded. The India-China fit is not only in terms of the costing. It works equally well where capabilities are concerned. The areas where China has excess capacity are often those where India faces a deficit. As a result, India has emerged as an increasingly significant market for Chinese ‘project exports’. In India’s current budget, 46% of the total plan allocations of the government is devoted to addressing infrastructure. During the current Five Year Plan (2007-2012), India’s target is to add almost 80,000 MW, approximately half
of it in private sector projects. In the roads and highways sector, the target is to push the pace of construction to 20 km per day. The steel industry, metro projects, railway modernization and ports/airports construction will all raise their own demands as well, as indeed will telecom where Chinese companies already have a strong presence. Aggregating them, it would be no exaggeration to predict that India’s infrastructure demands could well take its economic cooperation with China to a completely new level. Of course, given the nature of international relations, one cannot rule out that these calculations could go astray. There are four broad categories
now to a great extent and Chinese companies are back to doing business. Indian companies have their share of inhibitions, often reflected in anxiety about their widening exposure to China. Hopefully, as more business gets done, levels of trust too will grow. A second category arises from lack of understanding of the market. Chinese companies are still in the process of developing an approach for the Indian market. Applying a global template, they expect to send out large numbers of personnel including in the semi-skilled category without giving adequate thought to how they would be received. They are also still mastering the transmission of information
of risks that need to be effectively addressed if we are to ensure that this does not happen. The first category pertains to sentiment and emanates from a complicated history between the two countries. This sometimes makes even legitimate policy implementation by one party appear as a political move in the eyes of the other. Last year, Chinese companies initially perceived India’s efforts at enforcing its visa policies as a method of disadvantaging them. Once an effective employment visa system was put in place, these worries slowly dissipated. This year, concerns in India about security certification in the telecom industry were similarly interpreted. Addressing the certification issue would have been smarter than questioning it. In any case, that too has been resolved
without physical demonstration. When these approaches are challenged because of their unsuitability, they do not always appreciate the need to change their way of working. In the initial stages, commerce between the two nations developed almost on autopilot with Chinese companies simply responding to Indian demands. It is only now, after a decade, that a debate is taking place on the optimal strategy for India. The experience of the more successful Chinese companies points to their emphasis on localization. As sourcing from China increases, so too will market demands for greater localization. If they wish to continue growing in India, China’s industry will obviously have to contemplate greater commitments and demonstrate more creativity.
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |7|
INFOCUS | INDIA-CHINA | BUSINESS
A third category of risks arise from political issues. It is not easy to find a neat and ready description for India’s ties with China. The relationship undeniably has its share of issues. It has been our endeavour to manage them the best we can while searching for fair and equitable solutions. Perhaps, the success rate has been higher for the first rather than the second aspect of our approach. But nevertheless, there is today a considerable degree of stability and predictability in the relationship which then allows it to exploit the opportunities more effectively. At times, specific problems appear to create downward spikes. But the fact remains that neither side has an interest in eroding hard-won gains. Both would
familiar with, Indian companies were late in entering China. Discovering then that the domestic market here was largely closed, they saw limited merit in off-shoring their production in China when they could as well supply from a home base where they were more secure. High domestic demand was a further disincentive to look elsewhere. But today, many Indian companies are thinking global and can no longer afford to ignore the world’s second largest economy. They are prepared to take risks in a new environment. As a result, a growing number of Indian companies are setting up shop, arriving at the best approach through trial and error. They are, no doubt, walking down a path that their counterparts in the developed
is concerned, we need to persuade large and internationally aspiring Chinese companies of the value of working with India. They must get to appreciate that global corporations elsewhere are leveraging Indian IT for low cost design and target contenting, value chain optimization, capital efficiency and product development efficiency. Indian IT industry has evolved from mere project execution to an endto-end solution provider. Domain expertise attained by working with global corporations can be leveraged by Chinese corporations. The industry’s track record of delivering mission critical solutions based on international quality standards can enhance overall efficiency and competence of Chinese
be globally weakened if there is a general perception that they cannot manage their differences. Business does require confidence. It is, therefore, incumbent on both countries to ensure that their relations retain a positive trajectory if their economic cooperation is to prosper. The fourth category emanates the current structure of interaction. Continued and rapid expansion of trade and investment needs a broad perception that benefits of cooperation are equitably shared. Large and recurring trade deficits obviously do not contribute to that view, particularly when they reflect the market access position. If the Indian economy’s frugality is the secret of China’s success there, the formula for Indians making it in China is still evolving. For a variety of reasons that many of you would be
Indian companies have their share of inhibitions, often reflected in anxiety about their widening exposure to China. Hopefully, as more business gets done, levels of trust too will grow.
companies and help position them as global companies. A second area of challenge is in pharmaceuticals. Indian domestic industry was worth US $ 11 billion in 2009 and is expected to rise to US$ 30 billion by 2020. India produces more than 20% of the world’s generics and with US$ 70 billion worth of drugs expected to go off patent in the next three years in the US alone, this is clearly an area that will see considerable growth. To a joint venture partner, Indian industry brings branding, domain expertise, knowledge support and international networking. Contract manufacturing in India is growing rapidly and the US FDA has approved more sites in India than in any country outside the US. There are considerable opportunities today for Indian and Chinese companies to work together
world have trodden before, except that the Chinese competition has got much tougher in the meanwhile. There is no ‘one size fits all’ solution. In some sectors, we need to project our value as global partners. In others, we need to provide reassurance as a local presence. There are four thrust areas in India’s market development strategy for China. Where information technology
|8| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
– in China and internationally. The first will probably be necessary for the second to happen. Today, the lack of sales by pharmaceutical companies does not encourage more production in China, particularly when the approval process itself is seen as loaded against them. India, however, could well be a significant partner in the context of demands generated by China’s new health reforms. A greater import of Indian pharmaceuticals would be an important sign of China’s intent in this field. The Indian engineering industry is also exploring opportunities in China more aggressively. Not surprisingly, they encounter a combination of regulations, policies and vendor practices that
final analysis, China has an interest in not being perceived by them as utterly mercantilist. It is possible that this case for convergence might appear to some of you as underplaying the competitive nature of the relationship. Protagonists of the relationship have often pointed out that 99% of the shared history between India and China has been positive. Yet, since the 1% is of relatively recent vintage, it tends to assume an importance beyond its quantitative aspect. The reality is complex and need not necessarily be negative. Some convergence has manifested itself in the recent past though it was obscured by larger developments. Those familiar with colonial history may recall that the Indian independence movement
characterized once again by the two countries pushing an agenda that is at least partially shared and raising the prospect of cooperating to advance their individual interests. We saw this at Copenhagen on climate change. Similarly, it was in evidence at the Doha Round on trade rules and food security. At the G-20, India and China work together on the reform of financial institutions. The BRIC provides a forum for discussing broader questions. Indeed, as both China and India become more global in their interests, their points of intersection are steadily growing. They encounter each other in more ways and in more places than ever before. They share similarities not just in size, culture and history but
make this a daunting challenge. Apart from their own marketing and brand building efforts, it is possible that the growing Chinese involvement with infrastructure building in India will create relationships that can assist in that process. A fourth area of focus is agriculture and food products, where our negotiations are hastening more slowly than we would like. This is clearly going to be a test in perseverance. Doing business together involves addressing each other’s concerns. That is not yet happening adequately. As a result, many segments of the Indian business community find it hard to approach China with an open mind. They cannot understand why Indian IT, pharmaceuticals or engineering which are competitive globally somehow don’t seem to succeed in the Chinese domestic market. But, in the
actually enjoyed considerable support amongst the Chinese intelligentsia. Equally, China’s travails in the 1930s and 40s evoked great sympathy among Indian nationalists. Even today, an Indian medical mission that was sent out in 1938 remains a popular symbol of that bonding. In the 1950s, the two countries found themselves pushing parallel agendas on the global scene. They both had an interest in advancing decolonization, and as emerging major polities, in resisting Cold War bloc politics. It is, of course, a matter of history that by the beginning of 1960s, their relationship deteriorated significantly and it took decades for it to get back on track. The short point is that there is history, even recent history, of working together. This fact is important because today’s international system is
in aspirations and agendas as well. The challenge before them today is to elevate this convergence from a matter of necessity to a matter of choice. Progress in that regard would depend on the sharpness of their realization that for all their achievements, they still operate in a world where the rules are not made by them. A rising China seeks to revise this in its favour just as a rising India will. What remains to be seen is whether their efforts would reinforce each other.
Dr S Jaishankar is India’s Ambassador to China in Beijing
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |9|
f e e d b a c k how to make an effective policy without compromising its development needs. –Raju Patil, Vice President, Aplab Industries, New Delhi
Dispelling Stereotypes I read the India-China Chronicle for the first time and was very impressed by its look and content. In fact it was the attractive cover that caught my attention and then of course its unique content. I don’t think I have seem any magazine published in India or elsewhere which entirely focuses on India-China relationship particularly at a time when the two nations are poised for the great leap forward in the global arena. I found the cover story on the perception of people from both the countries of much interest. It goes to show how we get bogged down by stereotypes. I am looking forward to the next issue of the magazine. All the best! –Anshul Jain, Lawyer, New Delhi
Culture Bridge First of all, let me congratulate you on this excellent issue of India-China Chronicle. I have read all the three issues of this magazine and I must say that this issue was the best. It was fascinating to read the story about the Chinese girl Uma Li, who travelled all the way from China just to learn the Odissi dance. This shows that culture can play a big role in bringing India and China closer. We should have more such cultural exchanges, which will surely help to bridge the gap between the two countries. And I am happy that your magazine is contributing towaerds that goal. – Tahera Daud, Delhi University More on Business I happened to come across your magazine by chance at a friend’s place and really enjoyed the issue. The cover story “Face 2 Face” was
Lessons from China I always believed that India and China can never be friends and had a very negative perception about the relationship the two countries shared. But after reading the last two issues of this magazine, my perception seems to have undergone some change. I now believe that there are many areas in which the two countries can cooperate and work with each other. I really liked the article on renewable energy policy in India, which brings to light the areas in which India can learn from China on |4| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
very interesting and provided a good analysis of perceptions among Indians and Chinese on various aspects of India-China relations. There are a lot of articles on diplomatic and cultural ties between the two countries but not much on the business and economic aspects. As an industrialist interested in doing business with China, I would like to read a regular column on how business is done in China and how to overcome the various challenges faced by Indian businessmen while doing business with China. –Ashok Jindal, Prakash Industries, Gurgaon
CONTENTS
4 Feedback BUSINESS
6
One size doesn’t fit all
They have to play with rules set by others yet there is hope that the two rising nations are likely to play to reinforce each other.
LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT
10 Grass with no roots
Neither in China will harmony prevail, nor in India inclusive growth occur unless we have in both countries a much higher measure of people’s involvement in the building of their own lives.
COVER STORY
HOSTILE MEDIA
interview
24 Media must not
Sustained effort by the two governments is the only long term solution to improved media ties.
20 |2| India-China Chronicle July-August 2011
lose its soul
Prof Tan Chung is at present an Academic Associate at the University of Chicago and Emeritus Member of the Institute of Chinese Studies in New Delhi. Manju Hara caught up with the professor to understand his views on the prickly media issue.
28 VOICES
The media seems to be at war where India and China are concerned. Facts do not seem to matter as some Indian media organisations believe that is the best way to grab a larger market share. Similar responses are emerging from the Chinese side as well. The threat to a stable India-China relationship seems coming not from the governments, but from sections within the media. We spoke to a crosssection of media representatives to get their versions.
survey
34 Doomsday
Conspirators
Co-operation rather than conflict should have been the leitmotif of their rise as global economic powers, but both China and India have failed to dispel the mutual suspicion that blights bilateral ties. And the media must shoulder a lot of the blame.
photo features
culture
44 The Zen of
Buddhism
A religion that had its roots in India but blossomed in faraway China.
58 Chinese Spring
Festival 2011 & The Conference
culture
50 Cultural park
60 Exhibitions &
for all religions
It was the 11th century Tibetan poet who once said: “There is no place more powerful for practice, more blessed, or more marvelous than this (Mount Kailash). May all pilgrims and practitioners be welcome.” How true!
Trade Show
In India & In China
culture
53 Groundswell
economics conference
40 Reshaping
the world economy
China and India can complement each other by building good synergy between hardware and software—or in other words between the world’s factory and the world’s office.
of goodwill
Besides Buddhism, two towering figures have epitomized and carried forward India-China friendship and amity to great heights.
Tianchi Lake
56 Excuse me while
I kiss the sky
At this heavenly lake, white c louds drift while the mountains reach the blue sky.
film review
62 Farewell My
Concubine
beyond the great wall
64 A Morning Brush
with India
July-August 2011 India-China Chronicle |3|