{
"authors": [
"Srinath Raghavan"
],
"type": "commentary",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie India",
"Carnegie China"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie India",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"South Asia",
"India",
"East Asia",
"China"
],
"topics": []
}
India has always taken a multifaceted view of China. Yet broadly speaking, over the past seventy years, the relationship has evolved through three distinct phases.
The image of China in Indian minds has evolved and changed over the past seven decades. China has been perceived in many ways by many different audiences in India. At the risk of oversimplification, there have been three phases in which China’s image has changed and evolved.
The first phase lasted for a decade, from the founding of the PRC in 1949 to 1959. During these years, India regarded China as a fellow Asian country that had emerged from imperial control and stood ready to craft a new future. Although the political systems of the two countries were rather different, many Indians—including the top political leadership—believed that the countries had lots of avenues for cooperation and learning. This honeymoon period came to a close in 1959, when the border dispute came to the fore and the Dalai Lama fled Lhasa, Tibet, to take refuge in India.
Over the next three years, these tensions rose to a boil and culminated in the Sino-Indian War of October-November 1962. During the same period, public and elite perceptions of China turned sharply negative. For many Indians who lived through the defeat of November 1962, Communist China came to be seen as an aggressive neighbor that sought to humiliate a democratic, non-aligned India. It took almost three decades for China-India relations to recover. Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s visit to Beijing in 1989, and his meetings with Deng Xiaoping, marked the beginning of a new phase.
The most recent phase, over the past twenty-five years, has been marked by India’s admiration for China’s developmental accomplishments. India also has questions about what China’s rise means for the international order and itself. Can the cooperative and competitive elements in the relationship coexist?
This quick take is part of a series authored by scholars from across the Carnegie Endowment’s global network, in advance of the seventieth anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China.
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
In Central Asia, Beijing is learning to adapt. The era of raw economic assertiveness is giving way to a more nuanced strategy that fuses investment with education, infrastructure with human capital, and ambition with a dose of humility.
Edward Lemon, Bradley Jardine
Negotiations are bogged down in discussions over price, flexibility, and timeframe—and Russia’s lack of alternative buyers means China can take its time.
Sergey Vakulenko
The opportunity to outweigh the current impression of Putin’s diplomatic tour de force will only come in November, when Johannesburg hosts the G20 summit. But after this week’s events in China, it will be Trump, not Putin, who has to try to win over other attendees and prove that he is not the one facing international isolation.
Alexander Baunov
Moscow should be looking for ways to correct its course and restore balance in its foreign policy, instead of putting all its eggs in the China basket. But Putin is no pragmatic decision-maker, and the deepening vassalage to China is his own choice.
Alexander Gabuev
By entering this new stage of development of the automotive industry via Chinese electric cars, Central Asia will eventually be forced to adopt Chinese standards for the industry’s development, integrating into the Chinese tech ecosystem and leaving no room for competition.
Temur Umarov, Roman Vakulchuk