| |
Counterweight to China, not in Indias interest | Stephen W Bosworth, a former US ambassador to several Asian countries, straddles the worlds of advocacy and academia as a director of the influential New York think tank, Council on Foreign Relations, and as the dean of Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at the Tufts University. His forthcoming book on East Asia and China, for which he has teamed up with Morton I Abramowitz, a career US diplomat, is eagerly awaited.
During their recent meeting at The Hague, Bosworth told DNAs Josy Joseph that India has to be careful not to be drawn into any possible US strategy to create it as a counterweight to China in Asia. Excerpts from an interview:
How far should India go in becoming the counterweight to China in Asia, as many US analysts have been advocating? Is that a predominant thinking in the US and good for India?
There is a school of thought in Washington, some within the administration, some outside, which believes that a strong US-India relationship is an essential counterweight to China. I think India has to be careful to not get drawn into that kind of thinking. I don't think it is in India's best interest. Why do we want to recreate a global confrontation? First of all if the US were to try to contain China we would fail. China is not the Soviet Union. China for many countries is a very appealing partner. They are not an external threat to the security of other countries by and large.
I see no objective reason why there should be quarrels between India and China. You are not competing with one another for anything, nor do you have any significant territorial dispute. For the populations of the two countries the border disputes are inconsequential.
How would US fit into the emerging scenario, especially into the emergence of China and India?
We have a great challenge learning to live with the new China. We can live with the new India. That is not a problem for us. But China is seen by many Americans as a threat, economically and in the security sense. India is a democracy and its human rights records, though not unblemished, is much, much better than China's. Americans and Indians know each other a lot well. You have a lot of Indian emigrants to the US. It is going to be smoother relations.
There is a school of thought that believes bilateral trade actually goes up with tensions. Will that continue to be the future trend?
I think we would resist the temptation of containment. But that is not a sure thing. We would resist it because most Americans understand that it won't work. We can't control China, we can't contain China, but we can influence China. And we have been doing that. By far it is the best option. Integrate them into the global community, encourage them to become international citizens.
Are you happy to see the growing India-China relations? Is that the right track for New Delhi to pursue?
I think India is correct in having a balanced, non-conflicting relation with China. I think that is very much what China wants. You both have enormous requirements for domestic stabilisation and modernisation. Huge populations, too many of which live below the poverty line. So you don't want competition between the two. I think I would be fairly sanguine about the outlook for China-India relations. At the moment I would assess that in the modernisation race in many ways China is ahead of India. Politically India may be ahead of China although Chinese may not agree because they don't think democracy is an advantage.
|
|
|