China’s decision on Monday to lift its technical hold against listing Pakistan-based militant Abdul Rehman Makki as a global terrorist by the UN Security Council (UNSC) has been seen by India as a welcome change from its earlier stand.
But the timing of the decision has surprised observers and raised questions about the reason that compelled Beijing to lift its objection on Makki.
Makki is the Head of Political Affairs of the terrorist group Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, and the brother-in-law of the organisation’s founder, Hafiz Saeed. The UN had earlier designated Lashkar-e-Tayyiba a global terrorist organisation.
In recent months China had blocked four attempts by India and other countries to get the UNSC to proscribe other Pakistani terrorists, including an attempt to designate Makki a global terrorist in June last year.
“India remains committed to pursuing a zero-tolerance approach to terrorism and will continue to press the international community to take credible, verifiable, and irreversible action against terrorism,” Indian foreign ministry spokesman Arindam Bagchi said, welcoming the development at the UN.
The sanctions against Makki will lead to his assets being frozen and the imposition of a travel ban.
“Terrorism is the common enemy of humanity,” Chinese foreign ministry Spokesman Wang Wenbin said, while justifying the decision as conducive to enhancing global counter-terrorism cooperation.
Though the exact reason for the shift in China’s stand is not known, it has led to speculation in diplomatic circles on whether some important developments in the region had forced a change in Beijing’s thinking.
The move by China comes in the wake of the US weighing in on the current stand-off at the Line of Actual Control (LAC) between the Indian and Chinese armies, and blaming Beijing’s intransigence for the ongoing tension.
The Chinese decision also comes in the midst of a fundamental change in Japan’s defence doctrine, that allows it to develop pre-emptive capability to deal with enemy targets in a region where China’s growing assertiveness has raised serious concerns among its neighbours.
The development has forced Tokyo and Washington to forge a close defence and security partnership.
Referring to last month’s incursion into Arunachal Pradesh by Chinese soldiers, US Assistant Secretary of State for south and central Asia, Donald Lu, recently said that China had not made positive moves to resolve the conflict with India.
Lu said the US was with India on the issue and pointed out that Washington was the first one to criticise the Chinese action after the Galwan clashes in 2020.
A recent US state department statement also criticised China for continuing to amass forces and build military infrastructure along the LAC.
The developments on the Chinese side and its incursion into Arunachal is widely believed as an attempt to unilaterally change the LAC in its favour.
China has reacted sharply to the US comments and said that China and India were capable of dealing with the situation bilaterally, and there was no need for any “third party” to intervene.
The Chinese side also claimed that the border situation was “overall stable,” and that both sides had maintained smooth and constructive communications on boundary-related issues through military and diplomatic channels.
Bilateral relations between India and China have been under severe strain in recent months.
Indian Foreign Minister S Jaishankar has acknowledged that relations between the two were going through an “extremely difficult phase.”
India has maintained that normal relations between the two sides are dependent on China’s decision to restore status quo ante to April 2020 — the position where its troops were before Beijing’s unilateral decision to alter the LAC.
Jaishankar has said that “the state of the border will determine the state of the relationship.”
China has recently indicated that it wanted a reset in the relationship. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has said that China was ready to work with India to improve ties.
Wang added that both sides were committed to upholding stability along the border, and China was ready to work with India for the steady growth of China-India relations.
Some analysts have argued that the Chinese aggression at the LAC was a response to India’s growing proximity with the US, and its involvement in the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, or QUAD, where India is a member along with America, Australia, and Japan.
The Chinese statement and desire to reset relations with India could have stemmed from its attempt to ensure that its aggression does not push Delhi further into Washington’s embrace, and attempt to build an anti-Chinese coalition in the Indo-Pacific region.
While the decision to lift the technical hold on Makki could have been taken to establish China’s image as a committed player against global terrorism, It could also have been prompted by its desire to ensure that India maintains its strategic autonomy, and unlike Australia and Japan, it does not move not closer to the America-led coalition to contain China’s rise and influence in the region.
Whether China’s decision at the UN on Monday reflects a fundamental shift reflecting its desire to be more sensitive to India’s concerns, or it’s just a tactical move to refurbish its image, will be ascertained as things unfold in the coming months in the Indo-Pacific.
Discover the latest Business News, Sensex, and Nifty updates. Obtain Personal Finance insights, tax queries, and expert opinions on Moneycontrol or download the Moneycontrol App to stay updated!
