Scope for promotion of Sino-Indian relations
18 Aug, 2001 · 548
Abanti Bhattacharya criticizes the narrow military centered China policy and advocates broad based engagement with China including cultural and economic exchange programmes
After the 1962 India-China War our discussions on Sino-Indian relations seem to revolve around the question on how
China perceives us and vice-versa. Staying in
Shanghai for a year made me feel Indians just don't matter to the Chinese people and government.
India gets mentioned when one of her states is hit by an earthquake or is reeling under flood. The Chinese people do share the view that
India is an old civilization, and like
China , its history can be traced to antiquity. But our research scholars are pschyed with the 1962 India-China War, whilst the Chinese textbooks mention it only as a border skirmish. To
China ,
India does not loom as a security threat and; even after her nuclear tests,
China doesn't take
India seriously. Chinese scholars are more interested with developments in the
US ,
Japan ,
Korea and
Taiwan than in
India . This apathy towards
India is a major concern among Indian Sinologists who are overly exercised with the perception-misperception theory.
China is not a democracy, public opinion has no place in the government's decision-making process. Therefore, the border dispute should be solved by a security dialogue at the bilateral level. However, after the occupation of the Aksai-Chin area, the border problem for
China seems to have lost its significance. However Indians, particularly the Sinologists, feel tormented by the 1962 War, and their academic discussions get embroiled with the border issue and the Chinese perception of
India .
China and
India need to interact and understand each other, instead of tying themselves down to the bilateral security dialogue. New areas should be explored at the multilateral level where
India and
China share more commonalties than divergences. The congruence of interests on issues like regionalism, hegemonism, sovereign rights, human rights, WTO, environment issues, and terrorism offer a common platform for furthering interaction. At the multilateral level a cultural dialogue between the two countries could begin, and here lies the role of perception-misperceptions. In fact, these multilateral issues are basically socio-cultural where perceptions play a significant role; hence, cultural perceptions can be enhanced only by organized cultural exchange. Where do
India and
China stand in this matrix of cultural exchange?
China to be around 300, whereas its size in other countries is considerable.
China 's neighbour, the
Republic of
Korea has 1881 Indians,
Thailand has 6000 Indians and
Singapore 217,000. This indicates the poor level of cultural contact with
China . To build a cultural perception about Indians, there should be an exchange of visits by high-level government officials and businessmen. Trade delegations should be enhanced. Trade fairs should be organized to publicise
India 's manufacturing skills. Tourism should be promoted. More Indian students should be sent as part of cultural exchange programmes. Infrastructural facilities should be upgraded by establishing direct shipping lines and airline connections between the two countries. Indian cultural festivals should be organized to expose
India 's rich cultural heritage to the Chinese. In this age of information technology, media and communication should be explored to disseminate Indian culture. If Time magazine can reach
China , why not India Today. The publication houses should be promoted to translate Indian poetry and literature into Chinese and market them in
China . Yet another significant step would be to channelise the Indian Embassy and Consulates in
China to act as cultural ambassadors, instead of merely acting as political representatives of the government.
However, there is much confusion here among Indian scholars. First, they tend to link the perception-misperception theory with the border crisis. This crisis is a security issue and cannot be linked with perception-misperception issue. Second, perceptions are linked to public opinion. Since
What is the way ahead?
In its 2000-2001Annual Report, the Ministry of External Affairs has revealed the size of the overseas Indian community in
Therefore, instead of confusing the question of perception-misperception with security issues, we need to bifurcate the two, and deal with the border issue within the level of security dialogue. Secondly, there is no need to feel tormented and neglected by the lack of Chinese interest in us. Instead, we should explore the possibilities of enhancing Sino-Indian relations at the multilateral level. Third, we should create a sustained, recurring cultural exchange programme between the two countries to build positive mutual perceptions. This is essential to create a positive background for bilateral talks on security issues, particularly the border issue.
POPULAR COMMENTARIES
