Can India Afford to Boycott Chinese Products?

 

The Sino-Indian clashes, in Ladakh, in May 2020, evoked a clarion call of “ #BoycottMadeInChina – Software in a week; Hardware in a year” from Sonam Wangchuk - on whom the movie “3 idiots” is based. He is a local lad, frustrated like others, with the Chinese nibbling, of Indian territory, for over 70 years. On 15^th June, news of 20 Indian soldiers killed, by the inscrutable Chinese, with Neanderthal weapons – clubs wrapped with barbed wires - strengthened the resolve. The otherwise peaceful border - with no bullet fired since 1975 – was bloodied. India announced the banning of 59 Chinese apps like TikTok, Helo etc. – which the Information & Broadcasting Minister, Ravi Shankar Prasad likened to a “digital strike”. Delayed inspections, on Chinese imports, followed at the Chennai port - an attempt at imposing non-tariff barriers (NTB), copied from the Chinese playbook. De-escalation was announced for Galwan, Gogra/Hot springs even as unfruitful talks continued for Pangong Tso & Depsang Plains - impeded by Chinese intransigence - on retaining their 1959 claim line & creating a demilitarized zone in Indian territory through forced withdrawal of Indian posts.

If Military & Diplomatic talks fail – as appears likely – political intervention – similar to the one in 2017, to end the 73 day Doklam standoff would become necessary. A weaker player, generally, then ends up conceding more to maintain peace. While the domestic media narrative can be managed, foreign players watching the situation closely & aware of what actually transpired would draw conclusions, potentially conflicting with India’s aim at becoming the net security provider in the Indian Ocean region (IOR). Therefore, it is time we rationally evaluate the power differential between the two Asian giants to formulate an optimum strategy.

The official military budget of China at $179 billion is 3 times India’s – an indication of the gross national power asymmetry impeding military action. The Harvard University’s Belfar Centre study claims troop parity of 2.25 lakh & advantages for the Indian air-force, operating from its northern plains - with full load, unlike the Chinese, constrained operating in rarefied air from the Tibetan highlands at 50% load capacity. Likewise, Chinese strategic affairs expert, Huang Guozi, calls the Indian mountain division the best in the world. The Indian strategic affairs expert, Praveen Sawhney, however, avers that India is constrained by Chinese supremacy in the cyber, space & electronic domains & that perhaps explains the Indian quest for a diplomatic solution to the imbroglio. Russia – the Grandmaster of strategic diplomatic chess - appear to have played a useful role in cooling tensions.Higher Russian arms sales to India must have been an unacknowledged quid pro quo, since there are no free lunches in International relations.

As an alternative, to assuage public angst, some analysts have argued for hurting China economically. The economic data points follow:

(1)India’s Trade Deficit at $54 billion: India’s Director General of Foreign Trade tracks exports to China & its dominions - Hong Kong & Macau – separately. Therefore, some journalists have wrongly assumed that trade deficit, with China, reduced from $63 billion, in 2017-18, to $48 billion, in 2019-20, while the actual figs are $59 billion & $54 billion respectively - since China has diverted trade through Hong Kong. 

Furthermore, Chinese exports to India are about $85 billion - less than 3.5% of their total exports (~ $2500 billion) & hence a pittance – while our exports to China are about 8% ($330 billion) of the export basket.

Talks to reduce trade deficit - seeking greater market access to pharmaceuticals & IT -have largely been unsuccessful. China created Baidu – a Google copy – Alibaba – an Amazon copy – Sina Wiebo – a Twitter copy etc. by denying access to US tech multinationals; similarly, Indian service firms suffer from entry barriers while goods exporters face non-tariff barriers. Meanwhile, China has tried to catch up with the West on technology vide higher R&D investments & theft.

(2)India mainly exports raw materials to China; The top 7 exports are listed below.

 

(3)While India imports intermediate & finished goods

 

India, since 2017, has raised import duties – well below the World Trade Organization – mandated levels to protect domestic industry & dropped corporate tax to 15%, for manufacturing, from Oct 2019 in a bid to attract companies to invest in India. Furthermore, they have launched a production linked incentive (PPLI) of 4-6% to attract handset assembly to India. The PLI scheme should be extended to computer hardware, peripherals, electronic instruments & consumer electronics. Initially, components sourcing from China & assembly,in India, should be allowed to be followed later by encouraging local manufacture of components.

What should be the Indian Strategy?

But India & US account for about 95% of China’s trade surplus of $422 billion (India~ $55 billion) US ~ $345 billion); only a joint effort, can be successful. India on its own shall fail if its initiates a trade war with China as the latter - with an economy 5 times larger - can clamp down hard. Furthermore,  Chinese products could make their way, into India, through other nations where they have their subsidiaries or Free Trade Agreements (FTAs); tightening rules of “Country of origin” could help. Intermediate goods could be procured from other countries, but at a higher cost, which could either erode the profit margins of Indian companies or impact consumer wallets if passed through. A call to patriotism to make consumers pay more is merely rhetorical for a higher pay-out for one product would force a consumer to cut consumption on another or dip into savings, to maintain consumption,  either of which is not a desirable macro-economic outcome.

Joint effort at forcing China play by the rules of the international order is always a preferred option. The D -10 (Democracies 10) - as proposed by British PM, Boris Johnson, if it can evolve into a closed garden approach - of denying/reducing access to Chinese products into these markets - which account for about 50% of Global GDP, of $85 trillion, can be successful. However, Trump is mercurial & due for a re-election later this year & hence cannot be banked on; Joe Biden may well win & the real contours of his China strategy shall emerge only after he is sworn in. The resignation of Japanese PM Shinzo Abe & the willingness of German Chancellor Angela Merkel to continue to do business with China means that consensus on this issue shall be delayed. Partial decoupling could ultimately happen since the world has realized the perils inherent in the rise of a revisionist China.

The alternate view is that retreating from the global economy & xenophobic nativism does not help India. Rajiv Bajaj of Bajaj Auto alluded to how Indian 2 wheeler manufacturers – TVS, Bajaj & Hero – upped the quality game & defeated the Chinese in African & Latin American markets – earning a price premium too. There is no denying that ultimately we need to beat China through better efficiency rather than protectionism.

Therefore, instead of a sledge hammer approach of boycotting Chinese products, India could do the following

(a)Demand reciprocity on market entry & use Tariff / Non-Tariff Barriers to achieve same

(b)Segregate Chinese product imports into 2 categories – products with Strategic implications like Telecom, Active Pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs), power equipment etc. & those without. Dump down on the first category immediately - even if it means higher costs - while working on reducing dependence on the rest over a 10 year period through a well thought through FDI, Trade, Industry & Commerce policy.

Products with strategic implications can be identified by visualizing the likely Chinese war strategy

(1)China could, initially, initiate a cyber attack to run down the Indian military's command & control posts & follow it up by deactivating Telecom networks to create a chilling experience among the populace as part of Psychological warfare.

ERGO: Protect Telecom Networks by creating barriers to Telecom equipment supplied by Huawei & ZTE & ban Chinese Apps with a potential for collecting data & hence surveillance. Create a local ecosystem to produce own mobile components, as a medium term plan, to reduce reliance on China.

(2)China could use an Anti satellite System (ATS) weapon to shoot down Indian satellites to impede satellite communication, generally used to offer latency, in the event of Telecom networks downtime mentioned in (1) above. Laser weapons to damage cameras atop spy satellites could be another.

While US has GPS (Global Positioning System), India has NAVIC - used for real time positioning & timing of services, utilized while launching weapons. Attack on NAVIC inevitable but India can fall back on GPS, Galileo of the EU (European Union) or QZSS of Japan as an option.

(3)China could activate spyware embedded into power transmission equipment, plunging India into darkness, impeding Industry to effect GDP & manufacturing - including that of ordnance needed to be fed to front-line troops. Launching missiles to hit the hinterland is not essential if a power plant blast can be activated using Trojan horses.

(4)China appears to have secured the ability to hack into electronic spectrum to take control of enemy drones & air-crafts. Data links among fighter air-crafts has become an integral feature of network-centric warfare & needs to be secured.

(5)While India is the Pharmacy capital of the world, most of the APIs are imported from China & it is reasonable to expect China to restrict supplies in the event of a conflict. While Europe can be an alternative to supplies, it pays to create self sufficiency.

War theatre has evolved into a realm where Technology offers a country an option to wage a war without even a soldier crossing the border - through attacks launched vide cyber, space & electronic spectrum domains; India, thus needs to identify the Trojan horses embedded, in equipment, imported from China, & impose necessary safeguards.

Conclusion

The “peaceful rise” of China is an oxymoron. A dragon-elephant tango sounds romantic but just visualizing the discomfort of dancing with a fire spewing partner drops one to reality. Phased decoupling with China & encouraging allies to replicate the same is the solution.

 

The Chinese encroach into Ladakh – the 1962 redux?

In May 2020, while the world was distracted by the COVID -19  crisis, Chinese People Liberation Army (PLA) forces encroached into Ladakh, India, at 4 places – Pangong, Hot Springs, Galwan & Demchok, arguably, usurping about 40-60 sq. Kms of Indian territory. The Agreement on maintaining Peace & Tranquility along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), 1993, had thrown up 23 areas of dispute, during the Special representative (SR) meetings, over the years, between the two sides, on resolving border disputes that include Pangong & Demchok but not Galwan & Hot Springs or Naku La, Sikkim - another area where fisticuffs & jostling, between the security forces of the two sides was reported on 9th May -  adding credibility to the incursion theory. Capturing the strategic heights of Galwan, the Chinese forces threaten India’s Darbuk Shayok– Daulat Beg Oldie road – the only road link to Strategic Sub Sector North (SSN), Siachin & access thereon towards the Karakoram pass. Sino-Pak interoperability, in this sector, accentuates India’s security risks. Strategic expert & editor of “Force Magazine”, Praveen Sawhney, avers that the military level de-escalation talks that were held on 2^nd & 6^th June failed because the Chinese had taken Galwan off the table. Other reports claim Chinese unwillingness to withdraw from the mountain spur, finger 4, abutting the Pangong Tso - an 8 Kms ingress from finger 8.  However, unattributed leaks published since 9^th June claim “de-escalation” that runs counter to other reports of troop & equipment build-up indicating that the situation is tense. The absence of a joint statement  buttresses the viewpoint.

General Ashok Mehra, writing in The Wire, opines that "deescalation" could mean thinning of troops & material - tents, boats, guns tanks etc. - without the Chinese either being vacated/evicted from the disputed areas. Former Foreign Secretary & National Security Advisor, Shiv Shankar Menon, refers to the policy of "Two Steps Forward; One step Back" followed by China with a "net gain of one step". They could withdraw from certain areas but still retain certain strategic tracks.

Not surprisingly, the jingoism that marks Indo-Pak border tensions is missing from the discourse & has been replaced by calmer & nuanced positions.  There is a video clip, floating in the internet, of Ajit Doval – before he became the NSA, in 2014, stating that the Gross National Power differential between India & China is 3:1 & perhaps that explains the calm & the keenness to arrive at a negotiated settlement.

Pre Independence British India identified the McMahon line in the East – across Arunachal Pradesh - & McDonald’s/Johnson’s  line in the West – across Ladakh - as the border; the latter was breached, in 1962 & China occupied Aksai Chin – a territory of about 38000 Sq. Kms. With power differential, between the two countries, increasing across decades, the Chinese have resorted to a low cost "creeping acquisition" strategy to gain territory – initially nudging shepherds into “Indian” areas for grazing cattle to be later followed by Chinese patrols & finally the informal mud tracks converted into paved ones achieving a fait accompli.

Why Now? – The Timing of the Transgression

The inscrutable Chinese’s actions have been interpreted thus

(1)Drum Up Nationalism: Former Foreign Secretary, Nirupama Rao avers  that “adventurism & expansionism oxygenates China”; upping nationalism now when  China is suffering global condemnation, on the handling of COVID-19 crisis, helps  drum up support for the Chinese Communist Party & divert citizens attention from the economic downturn, jobs losses  & the consequent brewing subterranean angst.

That China has opened multiple fronts simultaneously – Hong Kong, Australia, US, East & South China Seas & India – which is otherwise a less than rational play, indicates, that China wants a violent skirmish - for invoking Nationalism or force the  enemy to genuflect without a fight & gain territory, thereby conveying an  image of “strength” both domestically & internationally. For the effected nations, though, it is a Catch 22 situation – whether to focus on combating the COVID-19 virus or an external aggressor, nothing short of a virus.

(2)Force Status Quo Ante On Article 370: A ‘disputed” J&K with demands for autonomy/ freedom, by local populace, nicely jelled into the Chinese playbook to keep India engaged in internal turmoil which was negated by the stripping of special status granted under Article 370, on 5^th Aug 2019; China objected to the creation of new Union territories (Federal areas) & carried the issue, along with iron brother, Pakistan, to the United Nations, but failed in securing much diplomatic success.

The mention, by Home Minister(HM), Amit Shah, in a parliamentary debate then, of taking  back Aksai Chin apart from POK (Pakistan Occupied Kashmir) that included Gilgit Baltistan - through which passes the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC ) – riled China no end as it challenges its strategic, geographic & economic interests; the  Indian Foreign Ministry tried, unsuccessfully, to douse flames by stating that  while internal changes are rights of a sovereign ,  they do not affect the Line of Actual Control (LAC ). An enraged China, ingressed, as soon as the snows melted, in Mar 2020, leading to the current stalemate. Takeaway: Either the HM should not have mentioned Aksai Chin – keeping it in the grey territory to accord plausible deniability - or should have gamed the likely Chinese response before making the announcement since rhetoric that has a potential to enthuse domestic cadre also carries with it likely deleterious foreign policy implications.

Likewise, Defense Minister, Rajnath Singh, inaugurated the strategic 80 Kms long Ghatiabaragh - Lipulekh road - towards the China-India-Nepal tri-junction -in May, creating a foreign policy crisis since Nepal has competing claims over the disputed territory. A low profile inauguration would have been a better choice. India today thus has China, Pakistan & Nepal breathing down its neck & insurgents in Kashmir waiting for an opportunity - a security challenge.

(3)Impede Indian Infra drive across the border: India till the turn of the last century, did not build infra across the Indo-China borders as an area access denial strategy to the Chinese; however, in response to increased Chinese infrastructure build-up reversed the strategy & has accelerated the process over the last few years inviting the dragon’s displeasure. That explains the increased skirmishes across the border over the last decade, accentuated by an undefined LAC.

Ambassador Gautam Bambawale believes that the Chinese incursion is aimed to accelerate the settlement of the festering border dispute. Do the Chinese presume that India of today can concede territory which a more resurgent one, 20 years later (say), shall not?

(4)Remind India of Chinese Red Lines– In May, BJP MPs Meenakshi Lekhi & Rahul Kaswan attended the swearing in ceremony, of Taiwanese Present Tsai Ing-wen, virtually while acting Director General of Indo-Taipei Association, Sohang Sen, was present physically. China might have viewed this as a case of India overstepping a Chinese red line of the “One China Policy” especially when Tsai has been vocal in opposing reunification with China.

Understanding the Chinese Mind:

A deep insight into the enemy’s mind is an essential prerequisite to predict, with accuracy, their likely moves & be ready with a more than proportionate response.  Better still: Pre-empt.

(1)Superiority Complex: Chinese rightly believe that they are a civilizational power but wrongly arrogate to themselves a superiority complex. Sarvepalli Gopal writes that Chinese Premier, Zhou en Lai expressed angst on how India – a third world power - can claims to have introduced a 1^st world power - China - to the Non Aligned Movement (NAM); this insight reveals that, China shall never accept India as an equal & with both of countries poised to leapfrog into preeminent powers, in the later half of the 21^st century, contestation more than co-operation is the likely way forward. The “Chinese dream” of being the numero uno power, by 2049 – commemorating 100 years of Chinese communist party in power – shall accelerate the inevitable.

Shekhar Gupta, of The Print, recollects Prime Minister Vajpayee disclosing that the Chinese, unlike others, do not believe in giving any concessions during a negotiation.

(2)Regime Preservation Through External Aggression: The famine &  people angst thereof consequent to the failure of the Great Leap Forward (1958-62) was diverted by attacking India in 1962, while the world’s attention was riveted on the likely nuclear Armageddon posed  the Cuban missile crisis; Aksai chin – a strategic territory through which the road connecting Tibet & Xinjiang passes through – was secured then. Earlier, anticipating World War II fatigue induced non-intervention, by the global powers, China gobbled up Tibet.  Now, with the world’s attention diverted towards COVID -19, India suffers another loss of territory while other South Easr Asian nations lose their Exclusive Economic zones.

Strategic Expert, Brahma Chellaney, avers that “”Chinese leaders have claimed military pre-emption as a strategically defensive act” & cites as examples their entry into the Korean War, in 1950 & skirmishes with USSR & Vietnam in 1969 & 1979 respectively. The “string of pearls” strategy of encircling India is operationalization of a Sun Tzu dictum: Contain an adversary by making its neighbourhood hostile. Strategic “deception, concealment & surprise” define Chinese actions.

(3)Shi: Michael Pillsbury, a former dove & now a Chinese hawk, in “The Hundred Year Marathon” lays out how the US was continuously betrayed by China. At the heart of Chinese strategy lies “Shi” – roughly translated into an “alignment of forces” which a skilled strategist can exploit to gain victory. This according to Sun Tzu is to nudge enemies to act in ways that work to his advantage. Ex Mao offered China as a US ally in 1969, against the Soviets, mediated by Pakistan & Singapore; Deng launched his charm offensive, in 1979, & induced the West to fund China's rise under the mistaken presumption, that with rising prosperity China would emerge democratic & accord greater respect to human rights.

He also avers that the Chinese strategies are distilled from the deception induced victories of the warring states period (475 BC – 221 AD). Deception & surprise - advocated by generals like Han Xin & Sun Tzu influence their thoughts. In the modern war theatre they have added psychological ops, legal wars & media wars to the mix making it more potent.

Needless to add, India & China are also fighting a civilizational battle. South Asian fables lionize the Pathans & Rajputs for being sticklers to "promises"even if it invites death (Pran Jaye, Par Vachan Na Jaye) -  while the Chinese accord a premium to ‘cunning” as practiced by the founder of the Han dynasty – Emperor Gaozi (Liu Bang). Perhaps, it is a “culture” thing. The clash of communism / “Socialism with Chinese characteristics: versus democracy is another.

India’s Strengths as seen by outside parties:

Huang Guozhi, senior editor of Modern Weaponry Magazine - affiliated to China North Industries Group Corporation Ltd (NORINCO) - in his article thepaper.cn opines that “the world’s largest & experienced with plateau & mountain experience is neither the US, Russia nor any European powerhouse, but India” & points to the 12 division, 2 lakh troop strong mountain division with plans to raise another 0.5 lakh strike force to buttress his argument.  With the highest outpost at 6749 m over mean sea level, in Siachen, the Indians have gained experience in high altitude warfare by adapting domestic weapons to be used across the plateau & mountains & complemented it  by importing from the US - M777 howitzers, to be transported by heavy lift Chinook helicopters & high calibre sniper rifles -  to boost its firepower & anti-armour capabilities. He cites shortage of ammunition & the lack of co-ordination between the Indian Army (IA) & Air Force(IAF) – forcing IA  to independently procure Apache helicopters, for the Army aviation corps (AAC) - as likely weaknesses.

The Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer centre believes that both India & China have conventional force parity with about 2.25 lakh troops raged against each other. India has about 1.75 Lakh  troops (Including 1000 member strong Brahmos  cruise missile regiment) in the eastern sector,  15,500 troops  in the Middle sector & 34500 (including a 3000 member strong T-72 tank regiment) in the northern sector, forward deployed with a single China defense mission unlike the Chinese forces who are based more deeply inland. China has 0.4 lakh troops in Tibet, 0.7 Lakh troops, in Xinjiang & 0.9- 1.2 Lakh reserves at the Western theatre command at Baoji & Chongqing far away from the border; a significant part of these forces shall be unavailable, reserved as they are either for Russian tasking or combating insurrection in Tibet & Xinjiang.  

The PLA Air Force’s (PLAAF) Western Theatre Command has 157 aircrafts apart from other drone armoury arraigned against India while the latter has 270 fighter & 68 ground attack aircrafts across the three commands – Western, Central & Eastern.  The Chinese J-10 is comparable to the Indian Mirage 2000 & the Su 30 MKI is superior to the Chinese J 11 & Su 27.Furthermore, Chinese fighters constrained by the high altitude, in Tiber & Xinjiang, carry only around half their design payload & fuel unlike the Indian aircrafts that take off from the Indian plains with maximum payload & fuel capabilities.

China does have a superiority in missiles though & the likely attacks on Indian airfields has been gamed by the Indians who have a strategy in place - repaving a blast crater with quick drying concrete, in 6 hours, or using the runway replacement fibre-glass mats to make a quicker turnaround.  The Belfer centre concludes that the India is in a stronger conventional position vis a vis China.

India, thus, is no pushover after all.

Crisis Resolution: Options

The crisis can be resolved in 5 possible ways:

(a)Indian forces push back Chinese forces using firepower; a short duration war

(b)India encroaches on Chinese territory of strategic value & negotiates joint withdrawal of both forces

(c)Diplomatic Arm twisting: In 2013, with Chinese forces pitched tents in Depsang, India conveyed to China that in the unlikely case of Chinese withdrawal the upcoming visit of Premier Li Keqiang would be cancelled. The Chinese fell in line.

(d)Of the 4 areas of encroachments, India requests withdrawal in 1-2 areas & the media channels, in India, claim victory. India agrees to withdraw a notification, passed recently, that tightened takeover norms, for Chinese companies, in India, as an incentive.

(e)US-India-Japan-Australia declare QUAD as a military alliance & invite other South East Asian powers like Indonesia, Vietnam, Philippines etc. to join the alliance in a bid to protect sovereignty.

Option (d) if adopted shall depress India’s standing further; unable to secure Doklam for protectorate Bhutan, in 2017, has led to angst in the Himalayan kingdom. (a), (b) or (c ) if adopted shall help India gain stature with more countries – currently afraid of the dragon’s ambitions - seeking India’s cover. Option (e) is a medium term option & shall involve sacrifices on strategic autonomy. Democracies – 10 (D-10) proposed by UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson & endorsed by US President Trump as an expanded G7 into G10 – including India, South Korea, Australia – is worth joining.

The presence of social media now, unlike the earlier controllable traditional media,  has given the people of Ladakh, an outlet to voice their bitterness at 70 years of Chinese creeping acquisitions, of their lands. Sonam Wangchuk - on whom the movie "3 idiots" was made - suggests a civilian movement - #BoycottMadeInChina" - Software in a week; Hardware in a year - to hurt her, economically, & inspire an internal revolt.Ambassador Phunchok Stobdan, suggests, that the earlier strategy of Indian forces preventing local civilians from travelling into borderlands - to avoid conflict with the Chinese - should be replaced by allotting 'land ownership' to local shepherds, in the frontier areas, who shall serve, in a way, as the first line of defense. Both the suggestions are worth evaluating.

Way Forward

Strategic affairs expect, C Raja Mohan, writes that analysts who attribute the Chinese action to India’s tilt towards the US are wrong; both US allies, like Philippines or Non Aligned Countries, like Indonesia, have been at the receiving end of a Chinese muscular approach. Philippines – under President Duterte embraced China, by terminating an agreement - that let US troops operate from the country - in Feb 2020, while Indonesia did not subscribe to the US view on a “free & peaceful Indo - Pacific” & worked with the ASEAN to craft an alternate moderate viewpoint - to appease China - without success. China claims Natuna Islands, of Indonesia, now - that is outside their nine dashed line that claims nearly 80% of the South China Sea while also including some islands - on which the Philippines has competing claims,-  under a new Chinese administrative district.

Truth be told: unlike in the past, China has military power to make good its claims he avers & quotes Thucydides: “The strong do what they can & the weak suffer what they must”. The solution: Address power imbalance.

Conclusion

Ambassador Ashok Kanta believes that the Chinese have become more assertive & aggressive & the current incursion is neither localized nor an isolated incident. It is likely that the Chinese military has been asked to push back, replicating the performance of their wolf warrior diplomats. Ambassador Bambawale opines that the current SOPs & drills have failed & in the absence of an agreement on the LAC, such incidents could get triggered in future too.

Clearly, India & China - poised to emerge as the preeminent powers in the later half of the 21st century - are into a clash - both civilizational & of the political models they profess. Relationship between these two great powers shall be defined less by cooperation & more of contestation in the years to come; incursion in  Ladakh is just a trailer.

The Chinese respect power though. They tested India in 1967 at Nathu La & suffered a bloody nose & the border has not seen a bullet fired since 1975. The QUAD is hence the military solution for the medium term & market access denial vide D - 10 the other, to hurt the dragon economically. In coastal China lies the manufacturing infra & India should build capability of threatening same to desist Chinese misadventures; setting up a military base in Vietnam to threaten Canton could aid the objective.

India can get greater bang for the buck - use existing power better - by eliminating operational inefficiencies. The blame game, on intelligence failure, between R&AW & IB on one hand & Military intelligence on the other, that led to the Kargil War, in 1999 or in Ladakh now needs to be evaluated. IA not conducting its regular exercises, in the border areas, this year, due to COVID-19, giving the aggressors a free passage is also disconcerting. Such loopholes needs to be corrected at the earliest.

India has global power ambitions but is today barely a regional power unable to tame even Pakistan. India & Russia spend roughly the same amount - about $60 billion annually - on their military as compared to an US spent of over $700 billion & China $179 billion. But none would dare encroach on Russian territory because of its technological competence - that includes missile defense systems like the S-400 or cyber warfare capabilities - despite suffering from sanctions. Therein lies a clue; the traditional logic advocated about India accelerating its GDP growth that would translate into a higher military spent - even at a flat 2% of GDP military spent annually - though important is not all encompassing.

It is time to spend disproportionately on technology by trimming manpower & creating theatre commands of the army, navy & air-force to ensure optimum utilization of resources. While the Belfar centre data alludes to Indian conventional superiority over China, in the contact kinetic domain, Praveen Sawhney emphasizes need for India to catch up in the non-contact kinetic domain (Missiles) & non-contact non-kinetic theatres of cyber, space & electromagnetic domains. In the interim, manage the smaller bully – China – by aligning with the bigger one – US, even while strengthening QUAD Plus & D-10 / G -10.

Imagining International Relations In The Post Corona Virus World

The COVID-19 “shock therapy” shall herald a paradigm shift, in international relations, & the world as we know today shall transform considerably forcing policy makers & diplomats to weave a new strategic narrative. Power shifts are inevitable but the course & timeline uncertainty shall imperil the best laid plans.

The most likely structural changes are as follows

(1)Welcome to a Bi-polar world: The opprobrium faced by the Chief of World Health Organization’s (WHO) Chief, Tedros Adhanom, for apparent delay in gauging the extent of the virus spread, in China,  & warning the world, of pandemic,  only on Mar 11^th tempted POTUS Trump to suspend funding for the WHO – when it needs it most – accusing it of “mismanaging & covering up the spread of corona virus” & insisting on “full accountability”.

The conspiracy theory of China using corruption to wield power disproportionate to its contributions to international bodies does invite traction. The verbal sparring - with Trump calling corona virus the ‘Chinese virus” raised the dragon’s hackles while the Chinese Spokesperson, Zhao Lijian, claiming that the virus might have been spread by the US army while participating in the Military world games held, at Wuhan, in Oct 2019 – ended perhaps, after both countries agreed to a truce – the longevity of which is uncertain. The anti China chorus is reaching a crescendo; even while the on-going Sino-US trade war muddies the water further, the unprecedented initiation of class action suits in the US, against China, Australian demand, pinning down China, by asking for an independent investigation into the origins & spread of COVID-19, demand by the German tabloid, Bild, for Euro 149 billion as pandemic reparation to Germany etc. aided by the increased bellicose tone adopted by Chinese diplomats shall force many nations to choose sides.

Former US National Security Adviser (NSA) HR McMaster writing in “The Atlantic” refers to China’s leaders belief that their revisionist agenda  has a narrow window of opportunity :”before its population grows old”; before other nations realize its true intentions  -“national rejuvenation at their expense”; & “before China’s economy sours”. The Goldilocks moment is in!!

The world in COVID 19 turmoil offers, China, a unique opportunity to emerge as a saviour offering Personal Protection Equipment (PPE), masks, pharmaceuticals etc. & the debt trap inlaid through the Belt & Road initiative (BRI) grants them “client states” – 23 countries, as of 2018, in “debt distress’ of which 8 – Montenegro, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Maldives, Pakistan Djibouti, Laos “already have unsustainable levels of debt” as per McMaster. With Russia firmly in a Chinese embrace & an ambitious Xi Jinping keen to leave his mark on history a shift to a bipolar world order getting accelerated is inevitable.

(2)The Post World war II architecture under stress:US provides $ 400-500 million, annually, to WHO versus China’s $40 million. While the US action of suspending funding looks inhumane, it is in line with the precedent set by Trump, in 2017, of withdrawing from the United Nations Educational, Scientific & Cultural Organization (UNESCO), in 2017; this action, ironically, helps too, in conveniently distracting voters from his own mismanagement of the outbreak.

The post World War II architecture erected by the US consisted on the United Nations (UN) to handle politics & the Bretton Woods Sisters - World bank & International Monetary Fund - to handle economics. US could impose its world view either by offering access to its huge market - about a quarter of the World's GDP now - or threaten regime changes through a military intervention or make sanctions effective by having dollar as the world's reserve currency & controlling international trade payments through the SWIFT. Edward Snowden's revelations on snooping vide cyber dominance & control on data are other vectors that helped sustain global dominance.

The unilateral US pull-out of the Iran nuclear deal brought the EU, China & Russia together with a desire to move past the US dollar system of SWIFT payments. China - the world's 2nd largest economy & among the top 3 in military might, now has the New Development Bank (NDB) & Asian Infrastructure Investment bank (AIIB) was an alternative to the Bretton Wood sisters apart from State owned banks & hence is prepared to challenge the US. By denying entry to Google, Facebook et al, into China, the dragon created its own global data factories vide Baidu, Tencent & Alibaba & in Huawei has the Telecom resource to enlarge its snooping universe.

An isolationist US, withdrawing from UN institutions & making World Trade Organization (WTO) toothless signals a crumbing edifice on which China would be keen to erect its own.

(3)The European Union (EU) project weakens: Brexit was only a teaser for many of the 27 EU member nations’ quest to reclaim sovereign control on policy issues. Germany being viewed as a hegemon, for its tight fistedness, after the Global Financial Crisis, in 2008, by nations such as Greece, Portugal  etc. & Berlin’s  reluctance, now, to the issue of joint debt under “Corona Bonds” faces opposition from countries  like Italy.

Unless Germany & France take the lead & offer solutions, the internal dissonance could derail the EU project. Meanwhile, China & Russia are relentlessly pursuing an agenda to extend influence westward; China quickly responded to Serbia’s plea for medical supplies just as Russia sent doctors to Italy to help them address the COVID 19 challenges; this soft power play runs parallel to Putin’s cyber power intrusion to influence elections in western democracies & helping support the fringe parties emerge into the mainstream in an attempt to gain influence.

(4)Deglobalization: Governments shall now use the crisis to advocate import substitution, & re-shoring of manufacturing.  Japan has already announced a $2.2 billion fund to wean back Japanese supply chains operating in the Chinese mainland. COVID crisis has exposed the chinks in the national security, of relying on China, for manufacturing or pharmaceuticals, on India. Trump’s “America first” entails winning back manufacturing from China & Mexico & services from India & there is a broad agreement across the aisle, in the US Congress, on the same: regime change - i.e even if Democrats come to power later this year - hence shall not make a difference. India has already been at the receiving end of  H1B visa issues, in the US, & the latest immigration restrictions, for a temporary 60 days, imposed by Trump, is a predictor of things to come. The instinct to protect the supremacy of the White Anglo-Saxon Protestants (WASP) shall likely play out.

With a competitive advantage in services, India has been trying to push for “labour mobility” in trade negotiations & has been suffering a pushback including in the recently concluded RCEP (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership) negotiations. Deglobalization is in.

(5)Governments swing “Left” of centre: The communist revolution in 1917 nudged Western Europe towards creating a “welfare state” architecture; “big governments’ to deliver services & arrangement of a social security net followed. A weakening USSR prompted a Republican POTUS, Reagan, in the US & Conservative Party’s Thatcher, in the UK, in the 1980’s, to push for a leaner govt. vide privatization. The breakup of the USSR & the rise of prosperity in China after it introduced “socialism with Chinese characteristics”- a euphemism for Quasi capitalism under a single party rule-  prompted other nations to tread the same path; reluctant ones were nudged by the World Bank & IMF whose undeclared objective was to prise open virgin markets for western capital. Both the Democratic Party in the US & the Labour Party, in the UK, abandoned their “working class” origins & re-crafted their Party’s under Bill Clinton & Tony Blair, in the 1990’s, by moving right of center.

World trade & commerce were encouraged as long as the Western world gained but things have started to change during the last decade. The fear of the world economic epicenter shifting towards the East prompted, surprisingly, another Republican – Trump to champion the working class angst, in the rust belt, to win elections. Likewise, a Tory, Boris Johnson, rides on Xenophobia & job loss fears to break the Labour strongholds in the north. People like Bernie Sanders are now forcing the Democratic Party to rediscover their working class roots. In short, western democracies are turning “left of center”.

(6)Power Grab by aspiring autocrats: Viktor Orban of Hungary has used the crisis to make Parliament grant him sweeping powers – to rule by decree with no expiry date. Having packed the courts with allies, initiating attacks to silence civil society & armed with a law to punish “fake news” he has all the weapons to perpetuate his reign uninterrupted. Democracy & rule of law thus faces its most intense challenge in many countries.

(7)”Privacy”- the collateral damage to save lives : While China is a known surveillance state, many Governments, across the world,  have used this crisis to nudge citizens to download apps to help them dole out health tips, identify COVID -19 infected patients nearby etc. Without safeguards & a data protection law, it could regress into mass surveillance going forward. While this is a “health emergency”, a national security bogey, can be invented later, to push for continued additional surveillance impeding privacy. The EU model of clearly defining the scope of data collected & debarring collectors for using data for any other purpose is the model worth replicating.

Conclusion: Corona virus Crisis is an opportunity for aspiring autocrats – like Hungary’s Viktor Orban - to grab unbridled power & countries like China to nudge the world towards a bipolar world architecture. As recession looms, job losses shall accentuate xenophobia impacting global labour mobility; populist leaders shall resort to protectionism & “big governments” running a welfare state. Some governments could emerge into a “big brother” avatar, enhancing surveillance under the guise of saving lives but with “privacy” the collateral damage.

National security concerns shall prompt reshoring of manufacturing & services & import substitution leading to consumer price rises & perhaps a reduction in consumer choices. Deglobalization is ushered in. As international institutions like the WHO suffer a trust deficit, weakening -  if not outright disintegration of the post-World War II architecture - gets accelerated risking the world getting segregated into disjointed islands. We move from the Before Corona (BC) world, of global connectivity, to After death of Corona (AD) world of relative isolationism.