The round table in a private chamber of a Beijing hotel was crowded with elegantly presented vegetarian dishes. Around it was a delegation of surprised Indian scholars, enjoying exotic mushrooms and unfamiliar greens, in animated conversation with senior scholars of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS). Encouraged by the bonhomie, an Indian delegate raised the issue of the border dispute with China — thereby tilting the conversation over a chasm of pain and mistrust, from which both hosts and guests pulled back not so much by instinct as by design.
The Indian scholars were on a mission to explore the full extent of dialogue and cooperation possible with their Chinese counterparts. Likewise the Chinese commitment to expanding common ground was expressed evocatively by a senior scholar: “For many decades it has been Hindi-Chini bye-bye; it is time that we were again Hindi-Chini bhai-bhai .”
This clear mandate from the Chinese government to its diplomats and research institutions will underpin negotiations when the Indian Prime Minister visits Beijing and Shanghai from May 14-16, 2015. The invitation to the Indian scholars was part of a wider Chinese strategy, recently spelt out by President Xi Jinping, to foster a network of exchanges and cooperation between Chinese think-tanks and outsiders with a view to raising the Chinese scholars’ global vision and influence.
As discussions between the Indian and Chinese scholars showed, possible collaboration must contend with underlying tensions. The dominant narrative depicts India and China as two rising powers who have similar interest on reforming the international financial system and working for a new world order. But just what does this mean in practice — particularly at a time when China’s growth rate is declining and India’s is on the rise?
At each of the half a dozen think-tanks and university departments that the Indian delegation visited, we found a positive description of China’s lower growth rate as a “new normal”. It was also self-evident that the Silk Road Economic Belt and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) are the key instruments of China’s plans for itself and this region in the near future.
The Silk Road Economic Belt — also known as the One Road One Belt — is an ambitious scheme articulated by President Xi Jinping at the end of March. China has projected the One Belt, which could potentially touch 4.4 billion people, as a way of fostering a more just world order. This belt, for the moment consisting of 63 projects in 60 countries, is about land and sea connectivity from the east coast of China across South Asia, Central Asia and Southeast Asia to Africa and Western Europe.
Chinese scholars openly voiced concerns about whether their economy can transition to the ‘new normal’ without social disruptions. But they placed more emphasis on India’s need for massive investments in infrastructure and China’s capability to provide that investment. Why then, they asked, is India suspicious of China’s intentions? Why has India not yet enthusiastically embraced the One Belt scheme?
While the scheme is avowedly inclusive, China has drafted and announced it in a unilateral manner. For the One Belt to be truly inclusive, India must be a co-designer of the scheme’s rules and vision. Likewise if the AIIB — headquartered in Shanghai — is to be a truly fair multilateral body, India ought to be the second largest shareholder, given the size of its economy.
Most of the Chinese scholars agreed with this view. “The Western model was based on a win-lose approach,” said one senior scholar, “but China is committed to fostering win-win deals.”
So then why balk on the border dispute, asked an Indian scholar. “Let us begin with economic cooperation, strengthen that and then later address difficult issues of border dispute,” was the uniform response from all the Chinese scholars — a reiteration of their government’s strategy. Some added, “China wants to help Modi deliver his economic promises… so India is more open to Chinese goods and also to selling to China.”
In a nutshell, rapid growth of the Indian economy is in China’s interest, both as a market for its goods and to tilt the shift of global economic power more decisively to the East.
What about environmental protection and social justice? Most of the scholars we met still hold the view that the economy’s growth must take precedence and tackling environmental problems can be delayed. Interestingly, though China is now investing more in environmental protection than before, the One Belt vision document makes only passing reference to sustainability.
In its most ambitious form, an Indo-Chinese collaboration to co-design the One Belt scheme would involve pooling knowledge and drawing globally on state-of-the-art technologies to make it a Green Network. This would mean developing infrastructure and industrial production based on innovations that make sparing use of natural resources and drastically reduce pollution.
In this respect, the challenge before Chinese think-tanks was spelt out in an article written recently by Fu Ying, Chairperson of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the 12th National People's Congress of China. In government-affiliated institutions of China, wrote Ying, the rules and regulations have tended to “…favor spending on hardware such as buildings and facilities instead of encouraging creative thinking — supportive more of the ‘tank’ instead of the ‘think’.”
A diversity of creative out-of-the-box thinking is certainly a well-honed skill among Indian scholars. However, both in India and China, the dominant discourse equates Gross Domestic Product with growth and progress and this tends to be impervious to challenges posed by thinkers who place greater emphasis on environmental regeneration and social justice.
An on-going dialogue between Chinese and Indian scholars could do much more than help to shape a friendlier equation between the two nation states. This is fairly easy. But a deeper and more ambitious exchange between a widening range of not just scholars but innovative grassroots practitioners from both Indian and Chinese society would have to tackle the big unanswered question — how can we grow our economies in ways that are sustainable for centuries to come.
Rajni Bakshi is Senior Gandhi Peace Fellow at Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations, Mumbai.
