Prologue
It is not appreciably understood by the Indian proletariat — not in the Marxist sense — that the Chinese are remarkably adept at collecting intelligence in general and perpetrating information warfare in particular. Therefore, I would make an impassioned appeal to my ever-so-delicate liberal friends who assume absolute deference in the presence of their contemporaries from powerful nations, to not conform— as is their wont — to the seemingly logical repudiation that shall be forthcoming in the unlikely event that this periphrastic essay of mine gains a degree of prominence. Liberals across the world squandered not a moment in refuting suspicions that the extant Coronavirus pandemic was a biological weapon that, owing to a serious aberration, broke out — as if they are intimately familiar with the endeavours of China’s Ministry of State Security. Such liberals are blessed with a heart that beats for sempiternal humanism and globalism — a positive sentiment with which I concur, yet often adhered to by them to so great an extent that it is often inimical to national interest. China respects strength and not the magniloquent internationalism professed by liberals.
What I shall pen in this essay emanates from whatever I have learnt from a few analysts — military and civilian alike — who are only too glad to educate us benighted masses on national security. None of my assertions owe their provenance to my personal imagination. The substance of my essay shall not be the specifics of the military skirmishes or the profundity of the geographical region in question, but the overarching reasons behind China’s aggression, or more accurately, Xi Jinping’s personal aggression reflected in his stance against India.
Main Topic
The reason behind China’s aggression is demonstrably simple. It is not fearful of India. It is prodigiously fearful of India. The fear emanates not on account of India’s military strength — China’s leviathan industrial capacity would anyway ensure that it out-builds and out-manufactures India in the event of a war — but on account of India’s refusal to be a pawn on Xi Jinping’s political chessboard.
Pandemics have emanated from China in the past, but the world forgave it and moved on. However, COVID-19 has led to a general sentiment of hostility from across the world against China. Nations have cancelled contracts with Chinese companies; the United Kingdom shall no longer entertain Huawei participation in 5G infrastructure and already looks for a coalition of countries, India included, for building such infrastructure. The same is likely to hold true for Japan and the United States. India has banned several Chinese applications, causing a substantial loss to Chinese companies. By banning TikTok, for instance, India has set a precedent for other countries.
The hostility from the world has been deleterious to Chinese interests. Thus, analysts are given to understand that Xi Jinping presently faces opposition within the Communist Party of China. Some contend that there has been a letter in circulation amongst party official circles expressing discontent with and distrust in Xi’s leadership. Such information is usually not available freely on the internet — analysts receive such information from their sources abroad. This makes public-domain corroboration almost impossible. Yet, should the letter in circulation be of unimpeachable veracity, it would be a phenomenal incident given the absence of Freedom of Speech and Expression in China.
At any rate, it would be expedient for Xi to protect his office. Supposedly, the lives of its former leaders are never blissful. The Chinese do not view former presidents with kindness. Once they retire, they live restful yet severely restricted lives. Xi would indubitably efface into oblivion. It is in his best interest to remain firmly entrenched on his throne.
Appearing dominant on the international stage is a classic statesmanship ploy intended to protect political interests at home. Thus commenced the extant aggression against India — historically a ludicrously naïve nation, lost in the labyrinth of lofty ideals. Casting serious cynicism over the intellect of its leaders is the fact that they could somehow never understand a rudimentary tenet: a nation can afford lofty ideals only when its economic and military foundations are strong.
With the ascension of Prime Minister Modi to power, India’s demeanour underwent a change. Though not with the requisite frequency, India hesitates no more to employ military force in order to punish the misanthropists who just cannot live and let live. It commenced with the surgical strikes in September 2016, when India avenged its martyrs by inflicting twice the damage. It progressed to airstrikes in February 2019, when India inflicted inordinate damage on Pakistan’s terror infrastructure. Yet, military action against Pakistan really provides no foundation for Indian rodomontade, for despite Pakistan’s grandiosity, it can really not afford a major confrontation against India. China was the real challenge. Presently, India has proven that it does not fear even China.
Xi’s plan backfired monumentally. China’s loss was many times that of India’s. To the further ignominy of China, India managed to recapture some of the territories lost in the 1962 war, employing out of all forces, the Special Frontier Force that consists mostly of Tibetans. This sends a very subtle message that India could endorse the movement for Tibet’s independence, though India may never publicly take such a stance. For all we know, India might not even have dedicated intelligence resources to do the same, but symbolism matters more than we would like to admit.
Then we have the forthcoming U.S. presidential election. In the analysis of Abhijit Iyer-Mitra, there has not been a president in the past two to three decades of whom the Chinese were positively terrified. It is no secret that Donald Trump has a proclivity towards mercurial demeanour. He is entirely capable of announcing a paroxysmal policy against China promptly on his Twitter account. His volatility is a source of consternation for China. The prospect of Donald Trump winning the election is alarming to China, which is why, as Abhijit contends, the Embassy of China in the U.S. is exacerbating the Black Lives Matter (BLM) sentiment by means of funds.
Needless to say, India must maintain its obdurate stance against China. This should, so far as ideals go, set a precedent for future governments. Our nation was previously acclimatized to philosophizing our ignominious acceptance of Chinese aggression as commitment to peace. Future governments must be compelled to take a stance in favour of India’s national interest. Here is hoping for a much more adamantine India; implacable with regard to its security.
