The Meeting of Two Asian Giants: Part II
Earlier this week, the leaders of two Asian giants met in Beijing to further boost their growing bilateral tie. Indian PM Manmohan Singh was on a three day official visit to China, 13 – 15 January 2008. This was the first visit by an Indian PM after five years and the fifth in the history of India – China relations. The last visit by an Indian PM to China was by PM Atal Behari Vajpayee in June 2003. PM Singh’s visit to China signified the new chapter of Indo-China relationship.
Significant improvements have been achieved by the two sides since the signing of a wide range of strategy to improve their bilateral ties in commercial, political and strategic areas in New Delhi in 2006. But there are also points of concern related to the Indo – China bilateral tie.
According to PM Singh, the bilateral trade with China has doubled in the last two years. The trade target of $20 billion set by 2008 was reached two years ahead of schedule (it has touched $38.6 billion in 2007) and the revised target of $40 billion by 2010 was likely to be achieved two years in advance. Furthermore, the two leaders agreed to mandate their commerce ministers to explore the possibility of commencing negotiations on a "high quality" Regional Trading Arrangement.
On political and strategic fronts, significant improvements have also been achieved in the last two years. Taking forward their 2006 accord, the two countries pledged to promote bilateral cooperation in civil nuclear energy, consistent with their respective international commitments. The Chinese also agreed to consider a visit to India by the head of their atomic energy agency. At the same time, China supported India’s aspirations to play a role in the UN, including in the UN Security Council.
On border issue, the two sides agreed to building a "boundary of peace and friendship" on the basis of the April 2005 agreement on political parameters and guiding principles to approach the dispute. The special representatives (dealing with the border issue) shall complete at an early date the task of arriving at an agreed framework of settlement on the basis of that agreement.
On the issue of climate change, they agreed to work closely to tackle global warming and emphasized the importance of tackling the issue as per the UN convention and Kyoto protocol, in particular the principle of common, but differentiated responsibilities.
Some points of concern, however, need to be elaborated here. Even though the two sides agreed to building a boundary of peace and friendship on the basis of April 2005 agreement, but it will not guarantee that the problem will soon be solved, especially in the current term of the Congress-led UPA government. The Special Representative-level talks agreed in 2006, which have gone through 11 rounds, made very slow progress.
But what has been clear from the time of Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s breakthrough visit to China in December 1988 is that a boundary settlement can come only through give and take, by whatever name called. ‘Giving’ large areas of territory held, or agreeing to significant transfers of population across the line of actual control (LAC), will not be politically feasible in either country. Thus, considering the seeming intractability of this dispute, the creative breakthrough was the political accord reached during the 1988 visit on the impermissibility of using force to alter the status quo along the LAC. This accord was subsequently formalised and firmed up and, in the words of the 2006 Joint Declaration, “pending resolution of the boundary question, both sides shall maintain peace and tranquillity in the border areas in accordance with the agreements of 1993, 1996 and 2003.”
Secondly, even though the Chinese has agreed to support India’s thirst of energy sources and considered a visit to India by the head of their atomic energy agency, but this does not guarantee that the Indo – US nuclear deal will go through smoothly, especially on the issue of importing nuclear materials from the NSG.
Finally, China’s statement that India has a role to play in the reformed United Nations, including the Security Council, cannot be seen as support for India’s claim to a permanent seat in the UNSC. But it is clear that both sides want to maximise bilateral relations.
Thus, it can be concluded that this part two meeting of two Asian giants had shown tremendous improvement, especially on the economic front while at the same time, some concern and patient should be on India’s mind if it wants to pursue its ambition in international arena and in atomic energy sector. Similarly, a more realistic and practical approach shoud be taken by India in order to solve its boundary issue with China, a delicate job for PM Singh and the Indian government.
Significant improvements have been achieved by the two sides since the signing of a wide range of strategy to improve their bilateral ties in commercial, political and strategic areas in New Delhi in 2006. But there are also points of concern related to the Indo – China bilateral tie.
According to PM Singh, the bilateral trade with China has doubled in the last two years. The trade target of $20 billion set by 2008 was reached two years ahead of schedule (it has touched $38.6 billion in 2007) and the revised target of $40 billion by 2010 was likely to be achieved two years in advance. Furthermore, the two leaders agreed to mandate their commerce ministers to explore the possibility of commencing negotiations on a "high quality" Regional Trading Arrangement.
On political and strategic fronts, significant improvements have also been achieved in the last two years. Taking forward their 2006 accord, the two countries pledged to promote bilateral cooperation in civil nuclear energy, consistent with their respective international commitments. The Chinese also agreed to consider a visit to India by the head of their atomic energy agency. At the same time, China supported India’s aspirations to play a role in the UN, including in the UN Security Council.
On border issue, the two sides agreed to building a "boundary of peace and friendship" on the basis of the April 2005 agreement on political parameters and guiding principles to approach the dispute. The special representatives (dealing with the border issue) shall complete at an early date the task of arriving at an agreed framework of settlement on the basis of that agreement.
On the issue of climate change, they agreed to work closely to tackle global warming and emphasized the importance of tackling the issue as per the UN convention and Kyoto protocol, in particular the principle of common, but differentiated responsibilities.
Some points of concern, however, need to be elaborated here. Even though the two sides agreed to building a boundary of peace and friendship on the basis of April 2005 agreement, but it will not guarantee that the problem will soon be solved, especially in the current term of the Congress-led UPA government. The Special Representative-level talks agreed in 2006, which have gone through 11 rounds, made very slow progress.
But what has been clear from the time of Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s breakthrough visit to China in December 1988 is that a boundary settlement can come only through give and take, by whatever name called. ‘Giving’ large areas of territory held, or agreeing to significant transfers of population across the line of actual control (LAC), will not be politically feasible in either country. Thus, considering the seeming intractability of this dispute, the creative breakthrough was the political accord reached during the 1988 visit on the impermissibility of using force to alter the status quo along the LAC. This accord was subsequently formalised and firmed up and, in the words of the 2006 Joint Declaration, “pending resolution of the boundary question, both sides shall maintain peace and tranquillity in the border areas in accordance with the agreements of 1993, 1996 and 2003.”
Secondly, even though the Chinese has agreed to support India’s thirst of energy sources and considered a visit to India by the head of their atomic energy agency, but this does not guarantee that the Indo – US nuclear deal will go through smoothly, especially on the issue of importing nuclear materials from the NSG.
Finally, China’s statement that India has a role to play in the reformed United Nations, including the Security Council, cannot be seen as support for India’s claim to a permanent seat in the UNSC. But it is clear that both sides want to maximise bilateral relations.
Thus, it can be concluded that this part two meeting of two Asian giants had shown tremendous improvement, especially on the economic front while at the same time, some concern and patient should be on India’s mind if it wants to pursue its ambition in international arena and in atomic energy sector. Similarly, a more realistic and practical approach shoud be taken by India in order to solve its boundary issue with China, a delicate job for PM Singh and the Indian government.
blog by Mas Qisa'i at 5:31:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home for More Stories