Abstract: The Bay of Bengal has for centuries been the scene of commercial and cultural interactions between the surrounding countries. In contrast, the second half of the twentieth century saw something of a hiatus. That break in continuity has now passed and the aim of this paper is to demonstrate how, in response to changing circumstances, a new dynamic is evolving. For different reasons, the region is being ‘repositioned’. One fundamental change is that the strategic redefinition of the Indian Ocean, so that it becomes part of the more expansive Indo–Pacific region, has effectively shifted the Bay eastwards. China’s presence in the region emphasizes this, while the littoral countries are all themselves on the frontline of far-reaching change. Nothing is as it was. Yet, for all that, the framework of governance is weak, opening the question of how to bring it more into line with the realities of the new situation. Full text available here.
Country or Region: China
Rao, P.V
Abstract: Motivated by regional economic integration and geo-strategic interests, the Bay of Bengal (BOB) littorals are now striving to build land and maritime connectivities to promote trade and investment networks. India’s geographic centrality to the BOB region makes it indispensable to any regional connectivity plan. Indeed, regional groups such as SAARC and BIMSTEC also encouraged its members to devise regional plans to build transport infrastructure; however, no enthusiasm was exhibited to create such linkages until recently when extra regional initiatives primarily by China began transforming the economic and geopolitical profile of the region as it pushed for transportation links with the BOB countries. Beginning with Burma, China moved ahead constructing a chain of infrastructure projects in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Thailand. Against this backdrop, this paper argues that more the extra regional initiatives than intra regional efforts have driven the BOB states to promote intraregional connectivities. Full text available here.
Matheswaran, M
Preview: India-Pakistan-China relations determine South Asia’s strategic stability. Recent Events and disputes have heightened regional tensions, and have drawn the world’s attention on the region’s potential for conflict. The fact that all three nuclear weapon states have long-standing border disputes has been used by the non-proliferation lobbies to consistently highlight South Asia as a nuclear flash point. The intractable Kashmir dispute continues to be cited as the potential trigger for any nuclear escalation. These concerns were brought to the foreas the world witnessed the two nuclear armed adversaries fight it out on the Himalayan heights of Kargil in May 1999. While India fought the war firmly, and displayed significant escalation control and management of international opinion, it must be acknowledged that both countries kept the conflict below the nuclear threshold, thus questioning the nuclear flash point theory. Full text available here.
Banerjee, Gautam
Abstract: The People’s Republic of China (PRC) identifies its primary interest with the perpetuation of the governance of the Communist Party of China (CPC). Continuation of the citizen’s acceptability is, therefore, the most salient concern for the CPC regime, which, unlike the bygone days of peasant revolutions, cannot be any easy goal to achieve in the ‘information’ world of today. This concern, inter alia, is considered by the Chinese leadership to be best addressed by the PRC securing its ‘rightful status as a global super-power’, the road to which is sought to be found through establishment of China’s global economic centrality, ‘consolidation’ of absolute control over its peripheral territories, achievement of regional political-military hegemony and affirmation of its superior status through ‘recovery’ of self-proclaimed ‘lost territories’. Full text available here.
Chhatwal, Ravinder Singh
Abstract: The Indian armed forces need not match the numerical superiority of the PLA in terms of manpower and equipment. There is no need for India to get into an arms race with China and match its inventory weapon for weapon. India needs to concentrate on maintaining a technological asymmetry to deter China from any attempts at coercion or to resolve disputes by use of force. Full text available here.
Kamath, P.G
Abstract: The question that arises is – can the countries of North East Asia cooperate and bring stability in the region? For any meaningful cooperation in North East Asia, two factors stand out that would always cast their shadow on the geo-political relations among the countries of the region. First, is the historical baggage carried by Japan for her ruthless invasions in the first half of the twentieth century. The Russo-Japanese War broke the might of a European power by an Asian power and subjected Russia to a humiliating treaty at Portsmouth. It resulted in Japanese occupation of the Korean peninsula and the resulting oppression and use of Koreans as ‘comfort women’ for the Japanese Imperial Army during the Second World War. Then was the Sino-Japanese war; the rape and sack of Nanking and the atrocities that were committed on its people by the Japanese Imperial Army, was indeed a sad chapter, as yet unforgotten in the minds of the Chinese. All this has caused xenophobia among the Chinese and Koreans towards Japan. It may take another generation to heal the wounds and soothe the minds for positive relations to be built. Full text available here.
Pradhan, Ramakrushna
Abstract: The fight for hegemony in Central Asia has existed for ages. Strategically placed between two nuclear powers—Russia and China—and geopolitically located at the heart of Eurasia, Central Asia has always remained in global limelight. Even after the disintegration of the USSR, the geopolitical importance of Central Asia never waned down, instead emerged as a grand chessboard for regional and extra-regional player for the immense opportunities it has offered in the form of widely untapped natural resources and geostrategic leverages. Importantly, it has emerged as the latest geological landscape for the energy crunch countries as potentially new and non-OPEC source of oil and natural gas. In the quest for energy security and diversity of supply sources by the energy consumers, the heartland region has witnessed a new great game in the scramble for resources. This accentuated struggle for oil and energy in the region has further led to aggressive foreign policy formulations and strategic calculation by countries like the United States, China, European Union, Japan, Israel, Iran, Pakistan and India, to which many now call as the New Great Game for not just controlling but administering the energy resources of the region. The bottom line of the New Great Game unlike the previous version is essentially played out around petropolitics and pipeline diplomacy. It is in this context this research article makes a modest attempt to examine the energy factor in the geopolitics of Central Asia and tries to figure out the position of India in the epic quest for oil in the traditional bastion of Russia and the new grand chessboard of China and the United States. Full text available here.
Farooq, Muhammad Sabil, Nazia Feroze, and Yuan Tong Kai
Abstract: China’s ‘One Belt One Road’ (OBOR) initiative has been billed as its most ambitious project ever in trying to shape and influence behaviour in the international system in line with her growing stature. At the same time, growing Sino-Africa relations have been the subject of scholarly debate with supporters taking an optimistic view, also presented by China itself, of this relationship being a win-win partnership. Critics led by the United States argue China is just using Africa to extract resources for its use, an allegation it refutes. The authors therefore sought to look at Sino-African relations but focussing on the implementation of OBOR in the African continent. Being the centrepiece of China’s foreign policy since 2013, a study on OBOR in Africa will give an understanding and hopefully answer some questions surrounding these relations. The lack of official bilateral agreements between China and some African countries has been examined, together with the possibility of expansion of the OBOR initiative to cover more African states. Full text available here.
Manish, and Prashant Kaushik
Abstract: This paper highlights China’s views regarding CPEC and argues that stakes are very high for China in CPEC, and it is a project that must succeed if BRI is to go down in history as a success. However, CPEC’s success cannot be ensured without responding to the security challenge present in Pakistan and Afghanistan, which has the potential to jeopardise the CPEC and as a result the entire BRI. Hence, China is required to engage with both Pakistan and Afghanistan to ensure the long-term security of the CPEC. Building of CPEC and its further extension leaves India with limited options but augmenting economic, political and security concerns. Full text available here.
Sun, Xihui
Abstract: In recent years, the Trump administration, embracing the principle of ‘America First’, adopts protectionism, doubts climate change and withdraws from many multilateral regimes in fields of trade, security, politics and global governance, while China firmly supports economic globalisation and free trade, adheres to peaceful development and advocates cooperation, openness, inclusiveness and mutual benefits. In these circumstances, there appears a heated debate on the shift of global leadership in academia and media, focusing on China. Beginning with summing up typical opinions about the issue of global leadership concerning the USA and China, the author conceptualises ‘global leadership’, analyses the nature and state of USA’s global leadership, discusses the Trump administration’s foreign policies and USA’s global leadership and comments China’s views and policies concerning global leadership. This article primarily argues that leadership, unlike hegemony, is not a zero-sum relationship, and there may be more than one country harmoniously and complementarily exerting leading roles in global affairs. Only by clearly differentiating hegemony and leadership can great powers better deal with their relations. Full text available here.
Xie, Chao
Abstract: Noticing the gap in the existing literature, this article attempts to argue that status-seeking motives do not necessarily result in zero-sum games and hence tries to summarise conditions for status-seekers to manage conflicts and realise cooperation with one another through creative use of social mobility and creativity strategies. As a case study, this article examines the evolving relations between India and China since 2013 and demonstrates how relations between these two status-seeking states can become confrontational with conflicting status-seeking incentives. For some time, the status competition seemingly dominated their interactions, when India was not willing to accept China’s power status second only to the USA, and China reluctant to recognise India as another rising power with nuclear capabilities. After the Donglang (Doklam) standoff, both governments are finding ways to manage an indirect path for cooperation through a newly discovered multilateral framework. The elements contributing to the stability of their relations lie in their choice of international identity and political calculations in which they can engage with the other based on their shared interests in fostering solidarity among developing countries. Full text available here.
Westcott, Stephen P
Abstract: The Sino-Indian border dispute has been effectively stalemated since the end of the 1962 Border War and remains a source of serious tension between the two Asian giants. Yet there were several instances throughout the 1950s and the early 1960s when the two sides could have resolved their dispute amicably. Curiously, despite several detailed historical accounts on how the Sino-Indian border dispute developed, there has been few systematic theoretical accounts exploring why this occurred. To address this gap, I utilise poliheuristic choice theory to examine the choices of the both the key decision-makers of the time, Mao Zedong and Jawaharlal Nehru. The poliheuristic choice theory illuminates why both Mao and Nehru initially chose status quo policies before embracing either compromise or escalation policies, when faced with domestic pressure at home and ideological impulses. Full text available here.
Kumar, Sanjeev
Abstract: In recent years, there has been a rise in China’s profile in South Asia. It is no surprise that Chinese experts have used terms, such as ‘new springtime’ in China–South Asia relations, ‘rediscovery of the strategic status of South Asia’ and ‘most relevant region with regard to the rise of China’. The objective of this article is to examine the nature and drivers of China’s South Asia policy, especially under the leadership of Xi Jinping vis-à-vis China’s policy towards the region in the past. It is not sufficient to only examine international factors or foreign and security policy in the context of the neighbouring region, such as South Asia. China’s ‘domestic periphery’ presents a significant threat to its national security. These areas are linked to neighbouring countries of South Asia and Central Asia. The announcement by Chinese President Xi Jinping of a ‘New Era’ or ‘third era’ in the history of Communist Party of China (CPC) represents a China which is known for its dictum ‘striving for achievement’ (fenfa youwei). This is different from the second era’s policy of ‘keeping a low profile and biding the time’ proposed by Deng Xiaoping. Of course, the name of Mao Zedong is synonymous with the first era beginning from 1949. Full text available here.
Surie, Nalin
Abstract: Given the essential positive history of China’s relations with India, China’s world view and the fact of geographical contiguity, the essential approach that China follows vis-à-vis India post 1949 is based on bilateralism. The bilateral approach has defined China’s negotiations over the border as well as economic relations between the two. In the past bilateralism has allowed China to consolidate its control over Tibet and follow a mercantilist economic policy vis- a- vis India. But the change in the geopolitical status of both nations indicates that bilateral relations, after Wuhan, have been reset to represent those between two ‘major powers’ who have broader regional and global interests as well. Although bilateralism will continue to underline their policies towards each other in matters of common development, regional development or the building of a community with a shared future for humanity, China will need to redefine its approach to bilateralism by broadening and deepening it to create a truly mutual relationship. Full text available here.
Lu Na-Xi, Huang Meng-Feng, and Lu Shan-Bing
Abstract: China and Russia issued a joint statement on 8 May 2015 outlining the main approaches to linking the Silk Road Economic Belt (SREB) and the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) projects. Both parties believe that to build the ‘Belt and Road’ project, it is necessary to use economic integration laws and actively enhance the role of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SOC) in stimulating regional economic cooperation, promoting construction of the SREB and linkage to and cooperation with the EAEU, creating a Free Trade Area (FTA) in the Asia-Pacific region (APR) and simultaneously begin creating a similar FTA among China, Russia and Central Asia to gradually stimulate interstate trade and promote regional economic development, actively developing—along with an improved model of energy cooperation—infrastructure and related industry and strengthening business contacts and jointly promoting construction of the SREB. Full text available here.
