Connect with us

South Asia

The Political Economy of Post-Galwan Valley Faceoff: Calibrated Moves and Restraints



Sino-Indian Relations and the Border Dispute

India and China share a 3,488 km long contentious border over which they fought a brief war in 1962. Since then both sides were involved in a number of minor skirmishes at the border, but none of them have matured into a full-scale war. Though many rounds of talks were held between the two sides, a resolution to the border dispute still remains out of reach. In the aftermath of standoff at Doklam in 2017, which then marked a new low in their bilateral relations in decades, sincere efforts were taken by both sides to ‘reset’ their overall relations. The informal summits that were held at Wuhan in 2018 and at Mahabalipuram in 2019 between President Xi Jinping and Prime Minister Narendra Modi were orchestrated towards this end. At a time when their bilateral relations have begun to show new promises, the recent incident at Galwan valley in Ladakh has posed a renewed challenge to the leaders of both the countries.

Asymmetry in Sino-Indian Bilateral Trade

Both India and China have a soaring economic relationship between them. The trade between the two countries amounted to $90 billion in 2019. Their bilateral trade is heavily skewed in favor of China, as it enjoyed a trade surplus of about $55 billion with India last year. In terms of percentage share, while China holds 14% share in India’s total imports, the latter makes up for less than 1% of total Chinese imports. This asymmetry is also compounded by the nature of goods traded between the two countries. While India exports mostly primary goods, like cotton, copper and precious stones, its imports from China comprises machinery, power-related equipment, telecom, organic chemicals and fertilizers. Of the total Indian imports from China, electro-mechanical and chemical products make up for more than two-thirds of the import basket.

As India’s exports to China comprise mainly of primary goods, it would be easy for China to find a replacement. On the other hand, the economic cost involved in finding an alternative to cheap Chinese goods will be huge for India, as it would hurt the competitiveness of Indian exports. This is because a major chunk of Chinese exports to India fall under the intermediate goods category, which are in turn used as inputs by key industrial sectors like automobiles, and pharmaceuticals. Thus, the current bilateral trade structure exposes the vulnerability dependence of India on imports from China. In this scenario, the Indian government’s recent announcement on national self-reliance is a step in the right direction. But at the present moment, the costs to India from any alternate policy would be unbearable. Therefore, the Indian government seems to have faced a serious dilemma as calls grew louder demanding a blanket ban on all Chinese imports.

Vulnerability Dependence and Conflict De-escalation

There is no dearth of liberal literature dwelling on the link between economic interdependence and absence of war between dyads. They argue that the economic costs of war would act as a deterrent on both sides in a situation involving economic interdependence. In the case of India and China bilateral trade relations, we have already seen that the dependence is highly asymmetrical, which makes India vulnerable to Chinese economic statecraft. Therefore, in a situation involving conflict between the two countries, the economic cost will be borne disproportionately by the Indian side. Still, this country level data does not capture a true picture of vulnerability, unless one looks at the effect of a ban on Chinese imports on the average Indian population.

It is well-known that the China goods are known for their price competitiveness on the global stage. This is true in the case of electronic goods and also for a range of other consumer goods, which include bicycles, furniture, toys, shoes, and mattresses. Therefore, a blanket embargo on the Chinese imports would hurt the average Indian consumer, who could not afford an alternate product even at slightly increased prices. Hence, it would not be in the interests of the median Indian voter if the Indian government decides to impose embargoes on Chinese goods. Based on these political calculations, no rational government would be willing to slap higher tariffs, let alone a blanket ban on Chinese imports. Also, the interest groups associated with those industries benefiting from trade with China must have played a key role in moderating India’s response to any incident involving China. Therefore, in spite of having a menu of signaling options to choose from that includes costly ones like trade sanctions, the Indian government decided to impose a ban on 59 Chinese apps, thereby opting for a relatively milder option. Thus, vindicating the liberal arguments on the link between economic interdependence and conflict, the Galwan valley incident, despite being the deadliest in decades, has subsided without further escalation into a full-scale war.

Is Geopolitics behind China’s restraint?

Realists argue that under conditions of asymmetrical interdependence, while the weaker partner in a dyad would exercise restraint, it is unlikely that the stronger partner would be deterred. However, on the contrary, while the Indian government succumbed to surge in nationalism after the Galwan incident by imposing the mobile apps ban, Chinese government is observed to have kept its nationalism under check and refrained from taking any retaliatory actions. This is in marked contrast to the CCP’s response to incidents involving Japan, during which it was often seen to have fanned Chinese nationalism. Also, China has once briefly banned the export of rare earth metals to Japan over an incident involving the disputed Senkaku islands. Likewise, China punished the Philippines by imposing restrictions on banana imports in retaliation over their maritime disputes in the South China Sea. Even in its recent discomfiture over Australia’s decision to call for an independent investigation on the origin of the coronavirus pandemic, China has imposed 80% tariffs on Australian barley imports. But following the Indian government’s decision to ban Chinese apps, the latter is quite reluctant to flex its economic muscle and reserved its response to expressing strong concerns over the ban. In recent years, India is openly observed to be inching closer to the US, as the latter is keen to enlist India as a partner in its strategy to contain China. At a time when its relationship with the US has been deteriorating, China views any alliance between India and the US to be not in its interests. Considering its proximity to China and its propensity for strategic autonomy, India has also been careful about maintaining a balance in its relations between China and the US. Therefore, given their soaring bilateral trade and investment ties, both India and China realized that it is in their mutual interests to reset their bilateral relations. Given this scenario, China is wary that the recent border skirmishes would further push India into the arms of the US. Therefore, despite being in a strong bargaining position vis-a-vis India, China has maintained a relative silence after the Galwan valley incident and agreed to rapid de-escalation to minimize the rupture in bilateral relations.  

The author is currently pursuing Ph.D. as a Junior Research Fellow (JRF) in the Centre for Canadian, US, & Latin American Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.

Continue Reading

South Asia

Indian Imbalanced Balance



A serious crisis is looming over journalism in India, which is increasingly vested in the hands of authority. On the one hand, Indian President Pranab Mukherjee asks for “discussion and dissension” for a vibrant democracy. “There should always be room for the argumentative Indian, and not the intolerant Indian. The media must be the watchdog, the mediator between the leaders and the public,” Mukherjee said while paying his regards to Ramnath Goenka – former press baron. On the other hand, Indian media has lost its credibility regionally as well as internationally owing to quality of Indian public discourse. According to criminal lawyer Rebecca Mammen, “The true test of a robust democracy is the independence of its media. Over the past few years our media has become the mouthpiece of the party in power. Coupled with the fact the corporate owners of media houses share close links with the government, the Indian media has tragically lost its voice.”

The mainstream media is vested in the hands of a selected few and refuses to question authorities.         The ‘Reporters Without Borders’ annual Press Freedom Index, which was released on April 20, has ranked India at 142 among 180 countries reflecting poor credibility due to pressures by government. According to the Report, the Indian media is reeling under a Hindu nationalist government, which has time and again tried to gag journalists. Moreover, India’s influential TV news channels function largely as government mouthpieces.A European non-governmental group “EU disinfo lab” had uncovered a network of 265 ‘fake’ news outlets sponsored by an Indian network to influence the European Union (EU) and the United Nations (UN) with content against to Pakistan.

The crisis in the Indian media will have deeper impacts on Indian democracy. With a feeble opposition, weak institutions, and an inadequate media, Indians have no checks and balances. For instance, maligning Pakistan High Commission, Colombo(PAHIC) during a recent Indo-China conflict was an Indiangovernment instructed media strategy to divert public opinion from their failures in North. In other words, media strategy inadvertently defines poor political will of India to stand up to China while feel strong enough to bully the smaller neighbourhood.

The sane voices in Indian media have continuously shrinking space.Having almost 400 news channels, Indian media has failed to highlight serious matters, such as beef ban, human rights violations in Indian Occupied Jammu & Kashmir (IoJK), and numerous discriminations against Indian Dalits. “Over the last few years – especially after Prime Minister Narendra Modi won the general election of 2014 – the Indian mainstream media has allowed itself to be undermined by the transcendent political power that he represents,” said Pamela Philipose, The Wire. “A new note of muscular nationalism has crept into media discourse.  Also conspicuous is the curbing of dissent and the rise of the surveillance state – developments that bode ill for the independence of the Indian media,” says Philipose.

In a similar manner, a political scientist Giles Vernier argues that “a new note of muscular nationalism has crept into media discourse.  Also conspicuous is the curbing of dissent and the rise of the surveillance state – developments that bode ill for the independence of the Indian media.One reason why we don’t see much criticism in the media is that the government, in the person of the Prime Minister, has the ability to completely dominate the media’s agenda, by saturating the public and media sphere with the message, image, and his voice.”

Journalists should be critical of government’s handling of its internal and external matters to keep it on the right track. TV channels will call speakers of their choice, who would heavily lean to one side of discussion and pretend that it is balanced.

In the current atmosphere, with enraptured legislative issues and social perspectives, with populist political leadership, with developing bigotry against minorities and dissenters, the media can and ought to be an encouraging sign for liberal, mainstream and law based thoughts, yet additionally to guarantee that outrageous perspectives does not get into the papers or on TV. Rather, the media in India has become some portion of the issue, either excitedly partaking in preparing of contempt against the helpless, or carrying on in an insincere path by permitting the most exceedingly terrible components a free run of significant reality on their foundation. Whole ages of columnists are growing up with the possibility that they are playing out an important help; they have scarcely any good examples to gaze upward to, since their own managers, who should know better, are either sold out, ideologically dedicated to fanaticism or are indecisive, without firm feelings or just fearful. In any case, Indian reporting is in a profound emergency, all for the sake of ‘balance.’

Continue Reading

South Asia

This is Pakistan



With an unprecedented progress in politico-socio-economic domains, Pakistan has a new face in the world. It has not only successfully corrected misplaced perceptions about it, but the internal and external circumstances around it have also changed, which has helped shaping Pakistan its renewed look according to changed regional and international environment. The successes at the security front has also led to the economic progress in Pakistan.

In result of Pakistan’s fight against terrorism and anti-extremism operations, it lost tens of thousands of people, including soldiers and civilians. Pakistan’s strong resolve together with sustained military operations against terrorist elements, however, brough back peace and stability in the country. According to Security Report 2019 by Pakistan Institute of Peace Studies (PIPS), “Pakistan witnessed a further decline in the number of terrorist incidents and consequent casualties… terrorist attacks this year decreased by around 13 percent as compared to 2018.” The report clearly depicted a gradual decrease in terrorist attacks and casualties since 2009. In this regard, Pakistan’s National Action Plan (NAP) helped eliminating the menace of terrorism from the country. The improved security situation in the country resulted in the economic dividends in the shape of China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).

Pakistan is also appreciated for its nuclear material safety. In its annual report, the Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) – a leading United States non-proliferation watchdogdivulged that “Pakistan’s improvements in the Security and Control Measures category are significant because strengthened laws and regulations result in durable boosts in Pakistan’s score as well as provide sustainable security benefits.” While appreciating Pakistan’s further improvement in nuclear materials’ safety, Laura Kennedy, a former United States diplomat, tweeted that “one welcome bit of news reported by #NTIindex is that #Pakistan ranked as most improved in security of those countries holding nuclear materials.”

Pakistan’s fight against Corona Virus Disease (COVID-19) is used as a role model by developed countries of the world. The Government of Pakistan (GoP) revealed a PKR 1.13 trillion relief package to help to the powerless and securing industry and other organizations. The concept of ‘Smart Lockdown’ also reaped its dividends and Pakistan has come out from the dangers of this deadly virus.

On the socio-economic front, Pakistan is making progress as well. For instance, the current account deficit has reduced from US$ 20 billion to US$ 3 billion together with a significant decrease in trade and fiscal account deficits. The stalled construction of Diamer-Bhasha dam has also been approved, which will result in additional water supplies for better agricultural production. There has been increase in the rights activism i.e., Transgender Pride March, Aurat March, Climate March, and Student Solidarity March. Women sports stars of Pakistan won international medals and recognitions.For instance, 8-year-old Pakistani Taekwondo star Ayesha Ayaz won a bronze medal for Pakistan at the 7thFujairah Taekwondo Open Championship in United Arab Emirates (UAE); Hajra Khan won 3 Guinness World Records; Mahnoor Shahzad won the Annapurna International Badminton Tournament; Nida Dar became the first Pakistani woman to sign a deal with an international cricket league, Sydney Thunder; Shahida Abbasi from Hazara won one of the total two gold medals for Pakistan at the South Asian Games 2019; and Mallak Faisal Zafar won first position in the Basic Novice Girls II category at the 24th International Eiscup Innsbruck 2019. Test cricket also returned to Pakistan.

Culturally, Pakistan is projecting itself more prominently. Pakistani celebrities are mamking it to international fashion weeks – Mushk Kaleem and Alicia Khan walked the ramp for Milan Fashion Week 2019. Pakistani film Laal Kabootar won the Vancouver International South Asian Film Festival for the Best Feature Film Award. ActressMahira Khan was appointed National Goodwill Ambassador for UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, strengthening the bond between the people of Pakistan and the international community. Moreover, Mehwish Hayat was appointed ambassador to UK based international humanitarian charity, Penny Appeal.

On the entrepreneurial front, 9 Pakistanis made it to Forbes’ coveted 30 under 30 Asia list: Ahmed Rauf Essa: Founder, Telemart; Karishma Ali, President, Chitral Womens Sports Club; Laila Kasuri, Water Analyst, Global Green Growth Institute; Hanaa Lakhani, Hasan Usmani,Gia Farooqi and MoneebMian, Cofounders, Roshni Rides, Zain Ashraf, Founder, Seed Out; and Zainab Bibi, Founder, Pakistan Society for Green Energy (PSGE).

Regionally, Pakistan’s foreign policy is paying its dividends. Pakistan’s relations among Iran, Afghanistan, Sri-Lanka, Russia, United States and others has improved significantly. Overall, there is many encouraging events happening in and around Pakistan.

Continue Reading

South Asia

Post-Pandemic Politics

Usman Ghani



Franklin Roosevelt has rightly put it, ‘In politics, nothing happens accidentally. If anything happens, it’s palpable that it planned this way’. Numerous features have been defining pre-pandemic world politics over the years. The current situation shows that pandemic will only reinforce largely five global fault lines that have been characterizing the global environment even in the pre-pandemic phase. Form this we can extrapolate the future course of global politics. 

The first and the obvious feature is the rising multi-polarity with power being diffused vertically and horizontally between countries and within countries because citizens become more impart by accessible cheaper technologies. Therefore, global power especially economic power continues to be redistributed while the state power also continues to be eroded by the greater influence of non-state actors both good and bad. In today’s world, no single power can achieve outcomes on its own. It can only do so in conjunction or with the cooperation of other states. Since the Second World War, this pandemic is the first global crisis in which US leadership has been absent.

Secondly, the resurgence of competition and tensions between the big powers in the global environment have come into sight. US-China confrontation has become the most consequential and geopolitical development, which is going to influence and shape the world in the coming years. It can be seen that an outbreak of trade and tech war during the pre-pandemic will continue in the future. Political tensions are also at a record high. President Donald Trump of the United States has been using hostile rhetoric against China. Because of the severe actions taken by the US, China has reached its limits and started pushing back.

Thirdly, global powers are retreating from multilateralism and a rule-based international system. The renunciation of international agreements and treaties has been witnessed over the months. The irony is that the pandemic demands greater solidarity and cooperation but quite the opposite has happened, where there is an absence of international solidarity and much less collaboration. The USA has renounced a long list of treaties including the Iranian nuclear deal, Paris Agreement on Climate Change, Intermediate Nuclear Force Agreement (INF), and recently the Open Skies agreement. It has also walked out of key multilateral institutions such as the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva and the WHO more recently.

Another feature is the rise of populist leaders who are often described as strongmen. Although it’s debatable how much they deserve the description of strong men. Populist leaders act unilaterally with impunity as well as seek to rewrite the rules of game either in the world or their region depending upon their capability to manage. They are mostly disdainful toward international norms. In South Asia, the grimmest example is Prime Minister Narendra Modi who is taking brutal and illegal actions not only in occupied Kashmir but also within India by pursuing communal politics.

Ultimately, there would be an emergence of anti-globalization sentiment due to multiple factors. The UN will be celebrating its 75th anniversary which is going to be a historic moment while American threatens to leave the World Health Organization (WHO) permanently. In this unenviable situation, the UN has been under great strain because its main agency which deals with the health crisis is under attack due to curtailment of funding by Donald Trump. Furthermore, certain leaders of the west are going to reject the existing trading regimes because they cannot compete anymore. The prevailing situation in those countries demands to remake global supply chains and they intend to reduce their dependence on China. Apart from that, plans are considered to move towards setting up local hubs of manufacture and supply.

In a nutshell, there is going to be a reversal of many aspects of globalization. Protectionism, trade wars, and to some extent travel restrictions will be a new reality. Right-wing populist leaders will use the health crisis to reinforce their policy preference for closed borders, strict immigration laws, and the ban on the free movement of labour that has been seen in recent decades. The future course of the most important bilateral relationship of our century which is between China and the United States will have a huge impact on the global economy as well as on the international order and multilateral institutions. Pandemic has further strained the relationship and resulted in trading accusations and allegations from both sides. Summarily, that has been described as the new cold war by many. The question arises whether these two global powers will arrive at modus vivendi or will there be a standoff. This has become a more enduring feature of the global landscape.

To round off the whole debate, the World is possibly at one of the history’s most unsettled periods in international relations with the atomization of the international system. This is an uncharted territory which the world has not seen before. For Pakistan, there are going to be strategic, political, and economic implications because it seeks to form good relations with both countries. Pakistan ought to understand that in the long run, its strategic future lies with China rather than the US.   

Continue Reading