The meeting between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao was supposed to be a dialogue between two heads of government who, according to an Indian official, shared a “strong personal chemistry” and a “positive rapport”. But if first impressions are anything to go by, they engaged in parallel monologues with the Chinese leader more keen to talk about banalities than to listen to constructive criticism.
The 11th meeting between Dr Singh and Mr Wen in over six years produced a bland joint statement, sanitised of all references to the contentious issues bedevilling their bilateral relationship. China remained non-committal on issues of “core” concern to India, such as stapled visas to people from Jammu and Kashmir, Chinese infrastructure projects in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, Pakistan-sponsored terrorism directed against India, and the border dispute. The joint statement arrived at after the hour-long talks was more a measure of what was omitted than what it contained.
China did make an effort, tentative though as it may be, to suggest that it understands and supports India’s aspirations for a permanent United Nations Security Council seat, and that it will be ready to import more from India in order to reduce the burgeoning trade deficit. However, all that the two sides had to show by way of results were a few agreements, the operationalisation of the hotline between the Indian and Chinese Prime Ministers, and the decision to hold regular high-level visits, including annual meetings between their foreign ministers.
The six agreements signed on the occasion were in areas such as cultural and media exchanges, cooperation in green technologies, banking, and China’s willingness to provide hydrological data on the Sutlej river in flood season.
A further indication of China’s insensitivity to India’s concerns about stapled visas came when foreign secretary Nirupama Rao evaded a direct reply to whether defence exchanges will resume. “Watch this space,” was all she would say at a hurriedly convened press conference. India suspended the defence exchanges in August, after China refused a visa to an Indian Army general serving in Jammu and Kashmir.
China remained mute on the issue of terrorism emanating from its “all-weather friend”, Pakistan, going only as far as to say that all relevant UN resolutions calling for the proscription of terrorist organisations such as Al Qaeda and its affiliates like the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba need to be implemented. Ironically, while the Chinese Premier was appreciative of India’s carefulness in not allowing anti-China activities on its soil, he would not expect the same from Pakistan vis-à-vis India.
On the boundary issue, India and China agreed to set up a working mechanism for consultation and coordination. “This (mechanism) will help enhance our mutual trust and maintain peace and tranquillity in the border areas,” Mr Wen said in a much-anticipated speech at the Indian Council of World Affairs.
Pakistan waded into the Singh-Wen talks when regional issues came up for discussion. India discussed its relations with Pakistan and “clearly put forward” its concern over terrorism originating from Pakistani soil, Ms Rao noted. Mr Wen referred to how terrorism posed a threat to the Chinese province of Xinjiang, and conveyed his sympathies to the 26/11 victims in Mumbai. However, his sentiments did not find their way into the joint statement. There was no mention of Tibet or India’s commitment to the one-China policy either in the joint statement but Ms Rao cautioned against reading too much into it. “(It was) not a bone of contention,” she asserted.
While the jury is still out on whether, from an Indian standpoint, Mr Wen’s second visit here in over five years can be termed a success, Ms Rao insisted that the India-China relationship is in a “process of gradual evolution” and that in the joint statement there was “evidence of a multi-dimensional, well-evolved relationship”.