Modi-Xi meeting is a good start but hard yards lie ahead

The operative part of the welcome but still very nascent improvement of the India-China relationship is contained in the words used by the officials on both sides.  India has referred to ‘dis-engagement and an eventual resolution’ and the Chinese emphasis is on ‘reaching a resolution’ by working with the Indian side – meaning thereby that the Kazan conversation is high on symbolism but sparse on content on the way ahead.

It is instructive that there was no joint statement after the Modi-Xi meeting in Kazan and both leaders were cautious not to raise unwarranted expectations.

PM Modi welcomed the resumption of dialogue and reiterated that peace and stability on the border should be a ‘priority’, while President Xi called on both nations to enhance communication and cooperation.

Will China accept status quo ante?

India has sought a return to the status quo ante that prevailed prior to Galwan as regards the patrolling protocols in the disputed areas of the LAC (line of actual control) and at this stage it is not clear if Beijing and the PLA would accept such a proposition. Military experts have pointed out that China has used the Galwan ambush to consolidate its tactical position along the LAC which is now more aligned with the claim it had advanced in 1959.

Thus while the Modi-Xi meeting at Kazan is to be welcomed, it also points to the very complex negotiations that both nations will have to engage in over the next   few years and explore the possibility of arriving at some degree of reconciliation through dialogue – and not getting into a tense eye-ball to eye-ball military posture in the high Himalayas.

The mistrust in the India-China bilateral relationship is deep and considerable irrigation of an arid ecosystem would have to be undertaken at different levels to reduce the current animosity and discord.

Clearly what happens in the summer of 2025 along the LAC will testify to the spirit of the Kazan conversation.

India’s a critical swing state

Since becoming independent modern nation-states, both India and China have nursed many deeply embedded anxieties about each other and burnished their individual aspirations about their place in the Asian strategic grid. For China, which places itself in the same league as the USA in acquiring a credible global profile – navigating Asia is the first challenge. In this context, both Japan and India are major powers who will not accept Chinese primacy, or a unipolar Asia and this irks Beijing.

Groupings such as the BRICS and the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization) are a means for Beijing to create alternate non-US led clusters and here India is a critical swing-state in the geo-political and geo-economic calculus. To its credit, India’s diplomatic acumen has been deft in avoiding getting locked into confrontational binary relationships and barring the current imbroglio with Canada – India’s relations with the major powers are stable and satisfactory, the differences notwithstanding.

The BRICS summit in Kazan was important in enabling a plurilateral dialogue among some major powers when two intense wars (in Ukraine and West Asia) have seen the UN Security Council in deadlock.

The championing of global peace, stability and progress at Kazan amidst the prevailing turbulence and sense of hopelessness must be applauded and supported. One hopes that this earnest ‘talk’ will be matched by a resolute ‘walk' by all the leaders.  The fact that UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres chose to be in Kazan is reflective of the dialogue imperative despite the relentless headwinds.