PRIME MINISTER MODI MUST CANCELL HIS VISIT TO CHINA

http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ChanakyaCode/chinas-reaction-on-modis-arunachal-pradesh-visit-pragmatism-demands-a-change-in-indias-policy/ February 22, 2015, 11:26 PM IST SD Pradhan Recent Chinese reaction to PM Modi’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh clearly reveals that Chinese expansionism continues unabated. The harsher and shriller statements this time were surprising as during Xi Jinping’s visit to India hopes were generated that China would stop such activities. Continuation of such activities establishes beyond doubt that China has sinister plans on our bordering areas and is not sincere in resolving the irritants through negotiations. PM Modi was in Itanagar in connection with the celebration of the 29th State Day function and inauguration of Naharlagun-New Delhi Express train. Chinese reaction was stronger as compared to its response when former PM Manmohan Singh visited Arunachal Pradesh in 2009. At that time China expressed its dissatisfaction with the visit. However this time the Chinese reactions are more stinging. Chinese spokesperson threatened that this visit would “complicate” the boundary issue and could obstruct the movement towards “good momentum towards the bilateral ties”. The spokesperson used the language that not only reflected the higher level of Chinese opposition to the presence of Modi but also claimed that Arunachal Pradesh is the Chinese area. Arunachal Pradesh was referred to as the “disputed area of eastern part of China-India boundary.” The statement also urged the Indian side to take the Chinese solemn concerns seriously. Later the Indian Ambassador was summoned and the Chinese protest was handed over to him. The pungent statements coming soon after the Xi’s visit and just before the Indian PM’s forthcoming visit in May suggest that Chinese policy of expansionism in its periphery has not been changed. The agreements signed since 1993 to maintain peace at the border have been violated by China several times. The Chinese incursions into the Indian terrirtory since then have increased in geometrical progression. India has only routinely registered its protests in the past. Often such incursions are termed as caused by the differences in perception about the boundary line – a justification given by the Chinese. However it is not only India which is facing Chinese aggressive designs but Vietnam and Philippines in South China Sea and Japan in the East China Sea are also the victims of Chinese expansionist designs. There are similarities in the Chinese policies towards all these areas. First China has an over-all strategy to acquire the areas in its periphery since long. Soon after 1949, in accordance with its strategy, it militarily annexed Tibet and then began to move towards other areas. China’s strategy has two dimensions-projecting claims and providing justification for those claims with the help of distorted historical facts. It made clear that it would not recognise the McMahon line as far as India was concerned. It placed claims on the Indian territory. Similarly it also claimed the Senkaku islands and almost entire South China Sea through the nine dashed lines on the areas of Japan, Vietnam, Philippines and Indonesia. The publicity campaign included cartographic aggression. Chinese passports began to claim all areas in the periphery attracting severe criticism from the concerned countries including India. Second common element is aggressive patrolling by its armed forces of the claimed areas to project that it can use muscular means to achieve its objectives. In the Indian territory, China is sending PLA patrols and their frequency of incursions have increased as also the number of troops crossing over to the Indian side. On the Indian side, several times the Chinese troops write on rocks that the area belongs to China. In the East China and South China Seas, vessels of reorganised Chinese Coast Guards, backed by PLA (N) are aggressively patrolling the area. They are also using aircraft raising the level of tension. While in India they have been sending helicopter, in Senkaku area they had sent jets. China also demarcated a maritime Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) that covers Senkaku islands. In South China Sea they are also creating artificial islands to increase their EEZ. Third common element is developing facilities which can be used for military operations. Along the Sino-Indian border railway lines and airfields have been constructed. In South China Sea, in the occupied islands, construction work is going on and it is expected that the facilities there could be used for military purposes. The deployment of troops and missiles only raise the fear among other powers about the Chinese intents. Fourth common element is that it is trying to use its economic relations with other countries to dissuade them to challenge its claims. For this purpose, it is showcasing that by maintaining close relations the countries in its periphery could gain. For this purpose it is focusing on four issues- (i) promoting the establishment of a new maritime silk road for the 21st century linking the Pacific and Indian oceans; (ii) the creation of free trade zones along China’s periphery; (iii) deepening regional financial cooperation by creating an Asian infrastructure bank; (iv) pushing for the conclusion by the end of 2015 of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), a free trade agreement that would include the ten ASEAN member states and its FTA partners (Australia, China, India, Korea, and New Zealand). While this aspect may appear quite justified, its ulterior motive is to pressurise its opponents to accept its claims and establish its hegemony in the region. In view of the forgoing, India needs to assess the Chinese aggressive actions holistically and evolve an appropriate strategy. Chinese incursions and sharp and shrill noises it makes on the visit of our leaders in our areas are indicate the Chinese sinister designs and its game plan to usurp our territory. Our lack of response or weak response on such incidents only encourages the Chinese to be more aggressive. This is perceived by China as India’s acceptance of their point of view. Indian top leaders need to learn from history that the policy of appeasement towards Hitler prior to the World War II led to only whet his appetite for expansion. India had committed a mistake by accepting Tibet as a part of China. Pragmatism demands that the Indian policy towards China should be revisited. As a first step India should make a firm statement that such acts of China would lead to deterioration in the bilateral ties. India should cancel all meets till China apologises. India’s stern message that Indian territory is non-negotiable. Second PM Modi should postpone his visit to China and make it clear that unless such activities come to an end he would not visit China. In fact the visit should take place when there is a substantial progress on the border issue. There is no point in signing another agreement which China would not honour. And third, it could convey to China that as a reaction to such acts India is going to revisit its Tibet policy. We have not achieved anything by pursuing the current policy. China continues with its policy of supporting Pakistan in nuclear and missile fields causing serious security problem for India