Geopolitics Leadership Media Policy Security

China Spins Jingoistic Narrative

Bharat hits back on Chinese Communist Party’s false claims on Arunachal Pradesh. Global community including US recognize the dragon ploy. Rohan Giri There’s something innate in China that cannot change. It’s in its DNA to encroach on others. As part of its grand plan to usurp others land, properties and expand its hegemony, China and its ruling Communist Party of China (CPC) have tasted success in few areas while they eagerly look at grabbing neighbours’ territories. Tibet is one area where Chinese Communist Party has had large success in altering names of places, assert control on large swaps of land and change, culture, languages and life of ordinary citizens. Through coercion, China constructed certain structures to also advance on its border regions through coercive means. Similar attempts have been made with Bharat’s territories especially Arunachal Pradesh to assert its dominance in the region. Communist Party of China and its life time General Secretary Xi Jingping announced Chinese names to places in and around Arunachal Pradesh. Latest in the Chinese ploy of old and deceitful rhetoric is evidenced by statements made by People’s Liberation Army’s Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang, spokesperson for Chinese Defense Ministry. By intention, he claimed that southern region of Xizang, the Chinese nomenclature for Tibet, was integral component of China’s territory. This was obvious reference to Arunachal Pradesh which China thinks is its own territory. Chinese Defense Ministry raked up the bogey on Bharat’s north-eastern state of Arunachal Pradesh after Sela Tunnel was constructed to enhance civic and military connectivity and capabilities in the state. The latest overtures by China expose the Chinese Communist Party ploy to initially seize Tibet and subsequently move in on Arunachal Pradesh. Bharat along with 17 other countries, mostly neighbours, has experienced adverse consequences of persistently making unsubstantiated claims by Chinese Communist Party. Henry McMahon, then foreign secretary of Britain drew an 890-km border between Bharat and Tibet in 1914. Arunachal Pradesh was formerly referred to as North Eastern Frontier Agency before the establishment of the McMahon Line. On one side of McMahon, Tibet existed as an autonomous region while on the other Arunachal Pradesh was an Indian state. Chinese communist party falsely maintains that Tibet is one component of China and refuses to acknowledge this demarcation. China’s aspirations for territorial expansion had begun to gain momentum at this point. The act of manipulating maps to include some regions of Bharat has been observed since ancient times, hence its innate to its nature. Bogus claims of Chinese communists were undermined when Japanese forces launched an invasion of Arunachal Pradesh, north-eastern state of Bharat during Second World War. Additionally, emergence of Chinese expansionism posed an enormous threat to Bharat’s territorial integrity. During that period, the British-led Indian Army provided protection to Tawang of Arunachal Pradesh. Bharat has had consistently maintained a firm stance against China’s claims and Arunachal Pradesh residents have historically rejected China’s expansionist aspirations and unsubstantiated assertions. Latest PLA statements on Arunachal Pradesh have come after Chinese Communist Party misleading names of 11 locations in Arunachal Pradesh. In addition to expressing their outrage, local populace actively engaged in peace marches on the roads, demonstrating their opposition to China. The protesting people were holding placards that read, “We stand by India” and “Arunachal is not part of China.” The posters in their possession had the message, “Don’t we know… How China is oppressing the people of Tibet and is always engaged in looting it? At any cost, we would not like the condition of Arunachal Pradesh to become like that of Tibet…” Individuals hailing from Arunachal Pradesh, holding tricolor flags, asserted that similar demonstration were held when China changed the names of six locations in 2017 and 15 locations in 2021. The misleading names were in the Chinese and Tibetan languages. In 2023, the controversy over stapled visas gained attention as Indian Wushu players were granted such visas by China. New Delhi-based think tank Center for Integrated and Holistic Studies, at that time, had reported that the “Stapled visas incident is seen more as one step further in China’s grand expansionist plan and communist vision to occupy others’ land disregarding international treaties, pacts and ‘gentlemen’ agreements to not change on-the-ground goal posts. Only way to put an end to this psycho-warfare like stapled visas is to firmly retake ‘Aksai Chin’ under its ‘illegal’ occupation since 1950s and held after the 1962 war.” Bharat and its government always said that Arunachal Pradesh was, is, and will remain integral to the country. China’s illegal expansionist strategy extended much beyond Arunachal Pradesh, Tibet, or Nepal. Countries and international communities need to be alert to such machinations and not succumb to mechanisms like debt trap, infrastructure development or other forms of avarice. (Author: Rohan Giri is a journalism graduate from Indian Institute of Mass Communication (IIMC) New Delhi, and Manager Operations at CIHS.)

Economy Geopolitics Leadership Misinformation Policy Security

730

Maldivian turn in the Tide: India’s safety net to China’s debt web

Shift in island nation’s strategic relations to curry favour with Chinese Communist Party bosses is fraught with danger of instability Rahul Pawa Maldives that has historically been a significant beneficiary of Bharat’s Neighbourhood First policy and a proximate maritime neighbour in the Indian Ocean Region, is re-positioning itself from the perspective of defense and security ties with Bharat. This reassessment is direct consequence of actions taken by newly anointed Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu, who rose to power advocating an ‘India Out’ campaign. Influenced by the pro-Chinese Communist Party (CCP) stance of former President Abdulla Yameen, President Muizzu has made a decisive move away from the cooperative relationship his predecessor, Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, maintained with Bharat. This shift became particularly evident with a statement issued on November 18, in which President Muizzu’s office formally requested withdrawal of Indian military personnel from Maldives. This request, signifying a departure from longstanding military cooperation between the two nations was earlier presented during a meeting with India’s Earth Sciences Minister Kiren Rijiju, who was in attendance at Muizzu’s swearing-in ceremony. Escalating the situation further, Maldives is now scrutinizing over 100 agreements signed with India during Solih’s tenure, covering areas of defense and security. Mohamed Firuzul Abdul Khaleel, the undersecretary for Public Policy in Presidential Office, disclosed the stationing of 77 Bharatiya military personnel in Maldives, spanning various military assets covered this scrutiny. This reevaluation of ties and November 18 announcement underscore a significant geopolitical shift in the region, marking a potential realignment of Maldives’ foreign policy away from Bharat and marks a tilt towards China. Maldives’ strategic pivot towards China, away from its traditional alignment with Bharat, brings a multitude of vulnerabilities and challenges for the island nation as well. This shift not only strengthens China’s influence in a region historically under Indian sway but also risks exposing the Maldives to economic and political instability. The alignment with China poses significant risk of ensnaring Maldives in a debt trap, akin to Sri Lanka as in the case of Hambantota Port and other infrastructure projects. Considering the Maldivian economy’s heavy reliance on tourism, financial burden of Chinese investments could be unsustainable. Moreover, this shift in foreign policy may lead to internal political strife. Opposition to the ‘China-triggered’ policies and concerns over national sovereignty could ignite domestic unrest, potentially resulting in a divided and unstable political landscape. On international front, moving away from India might strain the Maldives’ relationships with other regional powers and Western allies, who view China’s expanding influence with apprehension. This could lead to lesser foreign aid and support from these nations. The strategic shift under influence of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) represents significant departure from Maldives’ historical relationship with India, a partnership that has been a bedrock of stability and support, instrumental in the nation’s development and security. India’s role has been particularly pivotal during times of crisis, such as the 1988 coup attempt, 2014 water crisis and 2004 tsunami, offering a balance of economic assistance, defense cooperation, and diplomatic support. However, the new trajectory in favour of China opens Maldives to a host of risks that could have far-reaching consequences for its stability and wellbeing. Possible economic dependency on China, with looming threat of a debt trap, poses a significant danger to the Maldivian economy. This shift might not only leads to internal political instability but also exacerbate the nation’s environmental challenges. Maldives, already grappling with adverse impact of climate change and rising sea levels, may face further environmental degradation due to large-scale Chinese construction projects. In essence, moving away from India could isolate the Maldives from a historically reliable and benevolent partner, steering it away from the sources of strength and stability that have been crucial for its growth and prosperity. As President Muizzu seeks to establish new geopolitical alignments, the Maldives navigates towards a precarious future. The allure of Chinese economic support, while tempting, carries substantial risks, including the potential loss of traditional allies and internal political turmoil. This strategic pivot could leave the Maldives in a vulnerable position, both economically and geopolitically, with limited room to manoeuvre in an increasingly complex and competitive international arena. The future, as it unfolds, is fraught with uncertainty and potential instability for the Maldives as it navigates these significant geopolitical shifts. (Author is Director – research at New Delhi based non-partisan think tank, Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies)

Uncategorized

782

Chinese Puppetry on Show!

Probing charges of money laundering, peddling of Chinese propaganda by NewsClick is not suppression of press freedom K.A.Badarinath Noise on suppression of press freedom and free speech has not yet reached a crescendo. This noise has just begun in India with Left parties, their frontal organizations and anti-Modi political alliance partners going for the kill. Few activists from these political formations hit the streets on Wednesday protesting a probe against alleged China funded portal ‘NewsClick’ that reportedly laundered money to bankroll the dragon’s ‘propaganda’ vehicle. Portal’s founder Prabir Purkayastha and his human resources head were rounded up by special operations unit of Delhi Police after having questioned over a dozen journalists, consultants and later seized their devices for further investigation. Big question therefore is why all the noise on purported suppression of press freedom in India? Well, this is not the first time that such false narrative was peddled or reported in domestic and foreign media outlets in last ten-odd years. Two big charges against ‘NewsClick’ and its front-enders is that the organization worked as ‘propaganda vehicle’ for China. And, second serious charge is that foreign funds were routed through a millionaire businessman Neville Roy Singham to take forward nefarious Chinese Communist Party agenda in India. Well, only an in-depth investigation will bring out the facts and stick out separated from the organized noise of fringe Left parties that claim to protect, cherish and embellish Mao’s jinxed political thought. Firstly, is it a crime to investigate possible wrong doing by anyone concerned with ‘NewsClick’? The probe was launched by Delhi Police, Enforcement Directorate and other agencies only after having filed a detailed first information report against the accused on August 17 taking cognizance of ‘Chinese Propaganda machine’ related reports that appeared in The New York Times. These very political formations and self-styled proponents of ‘free press’ that hit the streets have had sworn by NYT on more than one occasion to hit out at the Modi government. Now, what’s wrong in investigating ‘NewsClick’ based on newspaper reports and Enforcement Directorate’s own research? The New York Times had pointed to a global web of Chinese propaganda that involved American non-profits which stretched from Chicago to Shanghai. This web as per NYT had NewsClick as an active participant. Now, why can’t the law enforcement agencies do their job of enforcing probity in public life, negate possible China propaganda campaign and stem laundering of foreign funds that made their way into ‘NewsClick’ during 2018 – 21 and used ‘against the Indian state’? Does this tantamount to suppressing press freedom? Or, is initiation of an inquiry anti-democratic by any stretch of imagination? It’s rather surprising that newspapers like ‘The Hindu’ and ‘Indian Express’ that were at forefront of investigating Bofors scam in early ‘80s and ‘90s editorialized the police action on ‘NewsClick’ as smacking of supressing press freedom. And, it is rather laughable. Crackdown against suspected crime by elements inimical to Bharat’s interests or exposing ‘NewsClick’ handlers in US and China cannot be equated with Smt Indira Gandhi’s decision to suspend basic citizens’ rights, impose internal emergency and curb press freedom in 1975 after an adversarial verdict of Allahabad High Court. Wouldn’t Ramnath Goenka, founder of Indian Express and Kasturi Ranga Iyengar of ‘The Hindu’ turn in their graves at the suggestion of curbing press freedom for investigating against ‘NewsClick’ management and their handlers? As in case of any individual or organization, don’t journalists have basic responsibility to submit before law enforcement agencies seeking to get at the truth? Making hue and cry of a probe may not drown the truth about irregularities at ‘NewsClick’. At best, NewsClick is a scrappy outlet that used invectives and propaganda to try and corner Narendra Modi government. And, it gained prominence only after The New York Times investigation linked it to a network that funded pro-China campaigns. Similar noise and public outrage was on show after BBC India operations were scrutinized for violation of Indian taxation laws. Tax sleuths assessment forced BBC to admit that it had under-reported revenues, profits and thereby evaded taxes. Reuters, The Hindustan Times and The Mint newspapers reported that BBC under-reported incomes worth Rs 40 crore to evade taxes. Well, income tax assessment of UK government funded BBC accounts was blown out of proportion and several of these very propagandists had jumped in to cite suppression of press freedom. There was no plausible explanation on how enforcement of domestic tax laws was same as suppression of press freedom. In the first place, big question was how did a foreign government funded media organization gather courage to evade taxes? Certainly, India is neither a banana republic nor subservient outpost of the erstwhile British imperialist rulers. When news laundry, yet another website were surveyed by Income Tax officials in 2021, similar charges of ‘intimidation and press freedom’ were heaped against the law enforcement agencies. Rule of law is what matters. Whether it is Bharat Samachaar or Dainik Bhaskar, media organizations need to be upfront given their distinct responsibility to readers, people that go by what appears in the media and the country. If thousands of websites, newspapers, TV Channels, social media handles owned by Indians, domestic corporates and foreign collaborations have been freely undertaking news operations, then where’s this suppression of press freedom? Seeking accountability is not equivalent to suppression of press freedom and rights. Newspapers, magazines and other media outlets in India like elsewhere have taken an independent editorial line in sync with their beliefs, understanding and assessment of a government, its policies and political ideologies. Editorial positioning of a media organization is distinctly different from resorting to irregularities, wrong doing, anti-India propaganda or joining flanks with the enemy. Let’s not equate press freedom with irregularities and anti-India tacit operations. Freedom comes with responsibility. (Author is Director& Chief Executive of New Delhi based non-partisan think tank, Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies)

Geopolitics Leadership Policy Security World

720

Maldivian Mirage, China Political Tightrope!

Maldives stands at a crucial juncture with President-elect Muizzu’s apparent tilt towards China signalling potential tectonic shift in regional alignments. While the allure of Chinese investments is evident, past patterns suggest that such engagements often come with strings attached, risking economic independence with potential threats to sovereignty. The historical bond with India rooted in mutual respect and shared interests, has ensured stability and growth for the Maldives. As the Maldives navigates its diplomatic path, it’s imperative to recognise the long-term implications of these choices. Over-reliance on China, given its track record, might provide short-term gains but could lead to long-term vulnerabilities, threatening Maldives autonomy, regional harmony and its historically enriched and etched relationship with India.

Economy Geopolitics Policy Security

909

Indian elephant outpaces Chinese Dragon

Beijing’s ambivalence came to fore at BRICS and engagement with New Delhi while India showed promise, responsibility and capacity to lead Rahul Pawa In this reshaping of the BRICS landscape, India has assertively stamped its diplomatic and strategic acumen under Prime Minister Modi, outpacing the Chinese dragon with the calculated grace of an elephant—focused, powerful, and increasingly influential. In the years since its inception over a decade ago, BRICS — Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa — has matured as an influential conglomeration for majority world. Engaging in dynamic interactions with the developed world, this ensemble stands on the cusp of potentially challenging G7’s dominance in global affairs. Yet, the trajectory it charts—be it one of constructive collaboration or divisive contention—will hinge heavily on the vision the forum holds. As Asian heavyweights, India and China have to jostle to sway BRICS their way as their strategic contest will shape 21st-century geopolitics. BRIC birthed on sidelines of the 2006 UN General Assembly as a grouping of large developing countries. Goldman Sachs economist Jim O’Neill has been credited for evolving the acronym in 2001 that captures zeitgeist of an era smitten with emerging markets. Those days, Brazil, Russia, India, and China were seen as newest frontiers of investment. By 2011, with South Africa coming on board, the acronym matured to BRICS. Today, the group no longer represents mere buoyant markets. It symbolises a collective intent to recalibrate the equitable global order historically skewed towards Western hegemony. Yet, for all its promise, BRICS stands at an inflection point. Skeptics question its cohesion, pointing to underlying rifts among member nations and ambiguity on its very purpose and membership. Yet, BRICS believes in the adage ‘strength in numbers’ as it quests towards a multipolar world order where developing countries have more influence, in line with their contributions to the global economy. Even as BRICS nations represent an overwhelming 41 per cent of world’s population, the bloc accounts for 31.5 per cent of global GDP, eclipsing the G7’s 30.4 per cent. It also commands a combined economic output valued at an astonishing $ 26 trillion, around 60 per cent of what the seven most industrialized nations generate. The staggering figures notwithstanding, a glaring inconsistency exists: the bloc’s modest voting power in the International Monetary Fund and limited decision-making in World Bank. It does not commensurate with the global influence BRICS commandes. Such disjunction magnifies a substantial source of apprehension among developing nations that have for long been seeking corrective measures to democratize these international financial and governing institutions. More than 40 heads of state gathered for the Johannesburg summit and the event marked a significant pivot in global affairs. Hosted by South Africa, the year’s rotating president following China, the theme—”BRICS and Africa: Partnership for Accelerated Growth and Inclusive Multilateralism”—spoke volumes. Notably, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa revealed that the forum had drawn intense global interest, with numerous nations seeking membership. However, amidst this diplomatic panorama, the magnetism of two Juggernauts stood out: India’s Prime Minister Modi and China’s President Xi, whose talks generated media frenzy. Correspondingly, the two leaders did have an “informal conversation” at the leaders lounge in backdrop of a pending request from the Chinese side for a bilateral meeting with India. India – China relations are etched in history of mutual reservations. Recently, tensions flared anew between the two Asian giants in 2020 when China ramped up its aggression along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), a move met with formidable resistance by India. The saga of China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) traversing through Pakistan occupied Indian regions of Gilgit-Baltistan and Jammu and Kashmir further complicates matters. These areas, occupied by Pakistan, are consistently contested by India as it persistently voices its objections on the International forums against the corridor. But Beijing’s ambitions don’t stop at terrestrial borders. It aims to shape the BRICS bloc – as a cornerstone of its own global strategy. From pushing the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), China seeks to recalibrate the world’s economic compass. On the contrary, steering clear of China’s political choreography, India zeroes in on bolstering regional economic collaborations and pushing for a recalibration of international monetary institutions to ensure the developing world isn’t left out. This nuanced strategy became increasingly transparent when India’s Foreign Minister, S. Jaishankar, dispelled notions of a nascent BRICS currency, electing instead to underline the importance of fortifying Indian Rupee in July this year. As BRICS itself stands at a crossroads and appears to positioned for a transformative global narrative, India navigates these waters with discerning caution. It remains vigilant to shifts that could potentially reconfigure this 16-year-old alliance in favour of a single, dominating power, effectively altering the multi-polar balance that has long characterised the consortium. As the gavel struck to signal close of the 15th BRICS Summit at Johannesburg’s Sandton Convention Centre, a renewed world order seemed to crystallize before the global community. The seismic pivot came courtesy South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, who announced the summit’s agreement to extend membership invitations to six emerging powers—Argentina, Ethiopia, Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. This dramatic enlargement, scheduled to take effect in January 2024, would make the bloc represent approximately 30 per cent of the global GDP, a financial heft rivaled by few. Amid this climate of heightened anticipation and future promise, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi emerged as the summit’s lodestar, charting the bloc’s course with a visionary range of proposals that struck a stark contrast to China’s mysterious reticence. Modi did not just navigate intricacies of the summit; he orchestrated them. India’s domestic and international roadmaps were laid out with compelling clarity. Whether articulating his ambitious aspiration for India to graduate to a developed nation by 2047 or laying bare his robust advocacy for key reforms in the United Nations Security Council and the World Trade Organization, Modi’s leadership radiated across multiple vectors. This was further illuminated by India’s pitch in the digital payments sphere, notably the Unified Payments Interface (UPI)

Geopolitics Leadership Policy Security

780

Quirky Chinese leadership undependable!

Retake ‘Aksai Chin’ under Chinese occupation, stop its draconian expansionist aggression and bring peace to Indian borders K.A.Badarinath China is at its old dark ways again. Otherwise, there’s no reason why three Indian Wushu sports persons from Arunachal Pradesh, Nyeman Wangsu, Onilu Tega and Mepung Lapgu, were given stapled visas. India’s Wushu team was to head for Chengdu to participate in the World University Games beginning Friday. The stapled visas issue is symptomatic of China’s war games and its claim on Arunachal Pradesh that’s integral to Bharat. The latest fracas seems to be scripted and directed by none other than the Chinese Oligarchs’ frontman and President, Xi Jingping who’s into his third term as head of Chinese Communist Party and also head of all powerful military commission. Most significant Chinese claim on Arunachal Pradesh ala indirectly through stapled visas comes on a day when three key developments were reported. Dichotomy in Chinese military checkers comes to fore on a day when Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jingping spoke on phone to bring about stability on the borders. In fact, this was the first recorded conversation of the two leaders after their brief in person informal interaction at Bali as part of G-20 group at the invitation of Indonesian President. After the Galwan valley Chinese misadventure, there has been no engagement between heads of state and President Xi Jingping was busy ensuring third Presidential term for himself apart from ‘cleansing’ the party from his political rivals and policy antagonists. ‘Stapled visas’ hogged headlines also on a day when reports poured in about the two leaders’ discussion on military standoff during April – May 2020 in Eastern Ladakh. What has induced ‘stapled visas’ issue larger significance is the reports of Peoples Liberation Army (PLA) heightened build up from Eastern Ladakh to Arunachal Pradesh borders during last few weeks? Nineteen rounds of corps commander level talks between Indian and Chinese side have not yielded results nor have led to sensitizing PLA Generals or belligerent Communist leadership in China that rules its own people with an iron fist. Sense that one gets is China’s outright refusal to disengage from at the strategic Depsang plains and Charding Ninhlunh nallah track junction at the Demchock in Eastern Ladakh. On the other hand, reports suggest continued build-up of bunkers, posts, artillery positions, surface to air missile systems, radar sites and ammunition storages. Development of new helipads, roads, dual use villages development and last mile connectivity has also been on the rise across the border leading to beliefs that negotiations at political level may ‘not yield’ on the ground results but discussions have to happen. Stapled visas incident is seen more as one step further in China’s grand expansionist plan and communist vision to occupy others’ land disregarding international treaties, pacts and ‘gentlemen’ agreements to not change on-the-ground goal posts. Only way to put an end to this psycho-warfare like stapled visas is to firmly retake ‘Aksai Chin’ under its ‘illegal’ occupation since 1950s and held after the 1962 war. China’s claim on Aksai Chin was made a couple of years after Indian Constitution was adopted in 1950 that included whole of Jammu and Kashmir along with Ladakh. Aksai Chin was part of Ladakh till the Chinese claim leading to its occupation in ‘50s. In fact, no Chinese maps till 1920s even showed Aksai Chin as part of China. Even in 1930s map of Sinkiang or Xinjiang, Kunlun mountains were marked as Chinese boundary and not the Karakoram range. Chinese posturing and war games that were shaped in ‘wolf warrior’ diplomacy doctrine is essentially unsustainable in any bilateral relations. Beijing will have to realize that false claims, wolf warrior diplomacy combined with on-ground, air and water bound aggression may not help in positioning itself as a leader as well. In fact, Qin Gang who’s been closest aide to President Xi Jingping and later anointed a state councillor was considered architect of wolf warrior diplomacy doctrine adopted by Chinese Communist Party as one of its key principles in engaging with the world. While there’s no trace of ‘missing’ Qin Gang, bringing Wang Li back as top Chinese diplomat and foreign minister may not help clear the air. Openness, flexibility and clarity of thought and attitude make great world powers. China has a long way to go leaving its shady past, false claims and drudgery that the communist regime is known for. (author is Director and Chief Executive, Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies, non-partisan think tank based in New Delhi)

Business Cyber Security Security Technology

1.33K

Chinese Loan Apps: A Debt Trap to Death Trap

Rohan Chinese loan apps, which offer quick loans with minimal paperwork, have become increasingly popular among Indian borrowers. However, these apps have also been associated with incidents involving threats to borrowers and compromising their privacy. One distressing case occurred in Bangalore involving Tejas, a 22-year-old engineering student. Tejas faced severe torture from an agent due to his loan from a Chinese app named Slice and Kiss, which ultimately led to his tragic suicide. The questionable practices employed by these apps consistently undermine the privacy and security of citizens, while their excessively high-interest rates and lack of regulatory oversight present substantial challenges to the Indian economy. This analysis sheds light on the various aspects of this phenomenon, highlighting the challenges posed by Chinese lending apps in India and emphasizing their potential risks. Perilous for Indian Citizens Chinese lending apps expose borrowers’ personal and financial information to significant risks, potentially leading to severe breaches of privacy. These apps often impose exorbitant interest rates and concealed fees, trapping users in a cycle of debt. Many borrowers, often in urgent need of funds, remain unaware of the predatory lending practices employed, ultimately landing themselves in financial distress. Moreover, these apps are associated with unethical and aggressive debt-collection tactics. Borrowers who fail to make timely payments or encounter financial hardships often face harassment, intimidation, and public humiliation from collection agencies. Such practices can have profound psychological and emotional consequences, driving vulnerable individuals to despair and, tragically, even suicide. Furthermore, inadequate regulatory oversight and accountability for these apps amplify their risks. With inadequate scrutiny, these apps operate with impunity, exploiting the financial vulnerabilities of Indian citizens without facing appropriate consequences. Numerous reports have surfaced regarding representatives of these applications resorting to intimidation, harassment, and threats towards borrowers. Particularly during the Covid-19 lockdown, borrowers facing financial difficulties due to the pandemic have reported terrifying experiences, alleging they were subjected to coercive tactics regarding their debts. These threats often take the form of deceitful letters resembling official documents or the harassment of borrowers’ relatives. These networks facilitating fraudulent instant loans extend beyond Indian citizens, as Chinese youths and students have fallen victim to this practice. China witnessed a wave of incidents related to “loans for nudes,” where numerous cases emerged involving young female college students being coerced into providing explicit photos as collateral to ensure repayment to loan sharks. These instances shed light on China’s pervasive underground banking scandal, exposing the murky realm of loan sharks. The cases exemplify China’s growing consumerism, underdeveloped financial system, and lack of a comprehensive student loan program. The Chinese Underground Banking Scandal The Chinese Underground Banking Scandal sheds light on a disturbing reality that lies beneath the veneer of the financial system. This issue revolves around illicit financial operations conducted outside the purview of established banking institutions, operating clandestinely and evading regulatory oversight. An essential aspect of this scandal is the pervasive presence of underground banks operating as unlicensed and unregulated financial intermediaries. These clandestine institutions play a significant role in facilitating a wide range of illicit activities, such as money laundering, human trafficking, capital flight, tax evasion, and the financing of unlawful transactions. The scandal’s dark reality is characterized by exploiting economic loopholes and manipulating financial regulations. With inadequate regulation and enforcement, underground financial networks flourish, enabling criminals to clandestinely transfer substantial amounts of money across borders, obscuring these funds’ origins and actual purposes. Moreover, the Underground Banking Scandal carries global implications, involving transnational networks engaged in illicit financial transactions. These networks contribute to the challenges faced by international efforts to combat money laundering, terrorism financing, and other forms of transnational crimes. It is important to note that not all Chinese loan applications are directly involved with underground banking, and vice versa. However, an interconnectedness can occur when funds originating from loan applications enter the underground banking system. In such cases, underground banking networks may exploit or utilize loan application activities for illicit purposes, including money flows, money laundering, cross-border transactions, and regulatory challenges. Data Privacy and Security Concerns The rapid proliferation of Chinese loan applications in India has prompted severe data privacy and security concerns. These apps often demand extensive access to personal information, posing threats to users. The loan apps often necessitate comprehensive access to users’ personal information, such as complete names, addresses, phone numbers, social media profiles, bank account details, and even access to the user’s smartphone contacts. The sheer volume and sensitivity of the data collected endanger individuals’ privacy and raise the possibility of it being abused for unauthorised objectives. There have been reports and allegations that certain Chinese lending applications have been involved in misusing and manipulating user data. Data breaches and unlawful sharing of personal information with third parties have been reported. Such activities violate users’ privacy and raise the risk of identity theft, financial fraud, and other forms of cybercrime. As Chinese lending apps are international, cross-border data transfers are possible. User data acquired by these apps in India may be transferred and stored on servers outside India, often in China. This adds to the difficulties of data protection because different jurisdictions may have different data privacy laws and regulations. The Chinese government’s vast access and control over data raise concerns regarding the privacy and security of user data obtained by Chinese loan apps. Users could be subjected to unlawful access or surveillance by foreign entities. The data privacy and security concerns stemming from these loan apps in India are significant issue that demands immediate attention. The Indian government has been actively enhancing data protection and privacy laws to safeguard user information from unauthorized access or misuse. The Personal Data Protection Bill, currently under review, seeks to establish comprehensive regulations and mechanisms for protecting personal data, including stringent obligations on data handling, storage, and consent. Indian Government Actions Recognizing the potential risks involved with Chinese loan apps, authorities have taken steps to protect customers, maintain financial stability, and limit the illegal operations of these platforms. The Indian government has banned 138 betting applications

Geopolitics Policy Security

855

Sino-India Relations: Clashes and Dynamics

Rohan Giri The aggression by the Communist Party of China (CPC) through the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) along the Indian border has been a source of tension between India and China. The CPC’s activities encompass infrastructure development, PLA buildup, and territorial assertions. One particular area of contention in the ongoing border contentions between the China and India is the Pangong Tso glacial lake region, which stretches across eastern Ladakh and western Tibet. In the aftermath of the violent clash in the Galwan Valley in 2020, both nations have notably escalated their respective regional infrastructure development endeavours. In recent years, the CPC has actively pursued infrastructure projects along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), with a particular focus on the Pangong Tso glacial lake area. Notably, one significant development is the construction of a bridge that spans the glacial lake, linking the north and south banks. This bridge holds significant strategic value for the CPC, as it improves connectivity and enables the smooth movement of military assets. Moreover, the CPC has successfully completed the construction of a second bridge and is currently working on establishing road connectivity along the south bank leading to Shandong village. Moreover, the CPC is currently undertaking the construction of a 22 km-long tunnel along the G-0177 expressway in Yuli, which will serve as a crucial link to the G-216 highway in Tibet. These infrastructure projects clearly demonstrate the CPC’s unwavering commitment to strengthen its presence and enhance its military capabilities in the region. The aggressive development pursued by the CPC is consistent with its regional ambitions and the aim to extend its influence and control over strategically important areas along its boundaries with India. This approach enables the CPC to assert power and establish dominance in border regions, potentially curtailing India’s influence. Moreover, these developments reinforce China’s publicised military capabilities and fortify border security, safeguarding its territorial claims and perceived national interests. However, India has also responded strongly to curtail China’s influence by actively engaging in infrastructure development initiatives in the Pangong Tso area. India has placed significant emphasis on enhancing road networks, establishing advanced landing grounds, and implementing other infrastructure projects. Construction work is currently underway to create an alternate axis to the crucial Darbuk-Skyok-Daulat Beg Oldie road, further improving connectivity and mobility in the region. The construction activities undertaken by the CPC have not only provoked India but have also necessitated the development of infrastructure in response. These infrastructure developments by both the China and India have resulted in a permanent alteration of the status quo in the Pangong Tso area. The construction of the bridge by the CPC and the black-topped road by India signify their respective efforts to consolidate their presence and enhance their military capabilities in the region. These infrastructure developments underscore the importance of constructive dialogue to prevent further escalation of tensions and uphold regional stability. The CPC is confronted with border tensions on multiple fronts as a result of its aggressive infrastructure development and encroachment policies. One notable area of contention is the South China Sea, where CPC’s territorial claims, represented by the nine-dash line, clash with the claims of neighbouring countries such as Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei, and Taiwan. These conflicting claims have sparked maritime disputes, heightened tensions, and escalated military presence in the region. Furthermore, in the Taiwan Strait, CPC regards Taiwan as an integral part of its territory and has not ruled out the use of force to achieve assimilation. The Taiwan Strait remains a potential hotspot, with CPC intensifying military activities and conducting drills near the self-governing island. This situation has strained cross-strait relations and attracted the attention of regional and global powers. In the Himalayan region, the CPC has long-standing border disputes with neighbouring countries, including India, Bhutan, and Nepal. The Chinese shallow and illegal claims in border areas have been vehemently contested, leading to CPC’s frustration leading to standoffs in the region. In addition to the aforementioned disputes, the CPC and Japan have a territorial disagreement concerning the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands in the East China Sea. Both nations assert sovereignty over these islands, which has resulted in frequent standoffs and heightened military presence in the region. The CPC’s claims and actions have raised substantial concerns among numerous countries. The construction of artificial islands, the militarisation of certain features, and assertive behaviour in disputed areas have prompted questions regarding the CPC’s intentions and its adherence to international norms. Thus, the CPC’s approach demonstrates a non-conformist mindset characterised by engaging in illegal infrastructure development, encroaching upon contested territories, and violating the sovereignty of other nations. An illustrative instance of this behaviour is observed in the South China Sea, which serves as a prominent example of a disputed territory. In this region, the CPC has undertaken the construction of artificial islands and the establishment of military installations in areas that are claimed by multiple countries. These actions have significantly heightened tensions and disputes with neighbouring nations, and have cast doubts on the CPC’s adherence to international laws and agreements, notably the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Coming back to intricate dynamics of Sino-India relations, which are characterised by complexity and nuance. It is important to maintain realistic expectations regarding the stability of the relationship, considering the long-standing territorial disputes between the two nations. The CPC’s failure to adequately address these disputes contributes to the ongoing instability in their bilateral ties. Additionally, both the China and India hold significant regional power status, and their geopolitical and strategic interests often intersect, leading to competition and conflicting priorities. Both countries are experiencing rapid economic growth and play prominent roles in the global marketplace. This economic competition, particularly in sectors such as manufacturing and technology, can strain their bilateral relations. Issues such as trade imbalances, market access, and protection of intellectual property rights further contribute to the complexities and potential frictions between them. India’s impressive economic growth positions it as a potential future global powerhouse. With its dynamic and youthful workforce, expanding middle class,

Geopolitics

714

‘India deserves a much higher, deeper, wider profile & global role’

Prime Minister Narendra Modi harps on ‘unprecedented trust’ as he emplanes to US for showcasing India’s smart and soft power prowess. By Rajesh Roy, Brendan Moran and Gordon Fairclough NEW DELHI—Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said ties between New Delhi and Washington are stronger and deeper than ever as India moves to secure what he sees as its rightful place on the world stage at a moment of geopolitical turmoil. “There is an unprecedented trust” between the leaders of the U.S. and India, Modi said in an interview ahead of his first official state visit to Washington after nine years in office. He hailed growing defense cooperation between the two countries as “an important pillar of our partnership,” which he said extends to trade, technology and energy. In Washington this week, Modi is expected to complete deals to manufacture jet-fighter engines in India to power advanced light combat aircraft, and to purchase high-altitude armed Predator drones from the U.S. in a multibillion-dollar agreement to boost surveillance efforts over the Indian Ocean and near its disputed border with China in the Himalayas. As the West squares off against Moscow and, increasingly, China, New Delhi stands to gain. Washington has courted India hoping that it will be a strategic counterweight to Beijing. The U.S. has moved to deepen defense ties even as New Delhi makes large purchases of Russian oil at discounted prices, providing financial support for Moscow as it wages war in Ukraine. Modi—who gives many speeches but fewer news conferences and interviews—spoke with The Wall Street Journal about India’s foreign policy, its efforts to build a more modern and sustainable economy and a range of other topics in a nearly hourlong interview in his office at his sprawling official residence in the heart of New Delhi. Overall, Modi’s message was that—from India’s role in global politics to its contributions to the world economy—the country’s time has come. He sought to portray New Delhi as the natural leader of the global South, in sync with and able to give voice to developing countries’ long-neglected aspirations. “India deserves a much higher, deeper and wider profile and a role,” said Modi, wearing a yellow kurta and light-brown jacket. Peacocks squawked in the garden outside. The 72-year-old leader called for changes to the United Nations and other international organizations to adapt them for an increasingly multipolar world order and to make them more broadly representative of the world’s less-affluent nations and their priorities, from the consequences of climate change to debt reduction. Unlike the vision of nonalignment advanced by Indian leader Jawaharlal Nehru in the early years of the Cold War, Modi’s foreign policy is one of multiple alignments, seeking to advance India’s interests in partnership with a range of global powers, including those in conflict with each other. Modi is one of India’s most popular prime ministers. He and his Bharatiya Janata Party won nationwide elections in 2014 and 2019 by comfortable margins. With national elections due next year, Modi’s approval rating is high. Political opponents and human-rights advocates have accused Modi’s party, which has roots in Hindu nationalism, of fostering religious polarization and democratic backsliding, pointing to issues such as restrictions on the press and removal of the special status of Indian-administered Kashmir to more closely integrate the Muslim-majority region into the country. Modi said that India not only tolerates but celebrates its diversity. “For thousands of years, India has been the land where people of all faiths and beliefs have found the freedom to coexist peacefully and prosper,” he said in a statement. “You will find people of every faith in the world living in harmony in India.” On the economic front, Modi has won praise for eliminating bureaucracy, relaxing rules and opening the way for more foreign direct investment. The country has surpassed China as the world’s most populous. What’s more, its population is young, promising a significant demographic dividend. The government has invested enormously in education and infrastructure, and it is poised to gain as multinationals look to diversify manufacturing and supply chains in an era of geopolitical tension. A new Apple store drew a crowd in Mumbai in April as the company expanded its investment in India. PHOTO: DHIRAJ SINGH/BLOOMBERG NEWS Apple is among the companies making significant new investments in southern India, with supplier Foxconn Technology Group planning new facilities in the states of Karnataka and Telangana and expanding iPhone production in the state of Tamil Nadu. “Let me be clear that we do not see India as supplanting any country. We see this process as India gaining its rightful position in the world,” Modi said. “The world today is more interconnected and interdependent than ever before. To create resilience, there should be more diversification in supply chains.” One thing India and the U.S. share are relationships with China that have grown increasingly fraught in recent years, marked by deepening military and economic rivalries. For India, that challenge is at its doorstep, with rising tensions centering around its decadeslong dispute with Beijing over the 2,000-mile border separating the two countries, known as the Line of Actual Control. The countries have been building infrastructure and deploying more troops in the region since a deadly 2020 clash in the Himalayas. Indian officials have blamed China for violating border agreements, and the two countries have held 18 rounds of military talks since 2020 aimed at preventing the dispute from spiraling into wider conflict. “For normal bilateral ties with China, peace and tranquility in the border areas is essential,” Modi said. “We have a core belief in respecting sovereignty and territorial integrity, observing the rule of law and peaceful resolution of differences and disputes. At the same time, India is fully prepared and committed to protect its sovereignty and dignity.” China’s Defense Ministry didn’t respond to a request for comment sent via the State Council Information Office. In drawing closer to Washington, the Indian government has had to overcome deep skepticism about the U.S. that dates back to the Cold War, when New Delhi became more closely aligned with Moscow after Washington declined to supply arms to India in 1965. The U.S. instead became a military backer

Geopolitics Leadership

725

Is China’s paradigm on ‘mutual success’ real?

Beijing has to come clean on larger issues, shift in outlook welcome. India never lost its ‘eastern wisdom’ while engaging with Western partners. Rohan Giri In an editorial, Chinese Communist Party’s mouthpiece, Global Times on May 30 indicated a possible shift in its India outlook. For a change, it captioned the edit, “We morally, emotionally support India’s de-colonization”. This comment on inauguration of a new Parliament building getting rid of the British colonial re definitely reflects Chinese establishment’s intent to go a wee bit soft on India. It has also garnered the attention of leaders across the globe. This change of heart, if it bears out in reality, cannot be ignored. Pleasing gestures like this editorial as exhibited by China present an intriguing subject for examination. As per reports from Chinese embassy and consulates, over 60,000 visas have been issued to Indians visiting China in first five months of this year. Furthermore, Chinese missions globally have affirmed their readiness to grant more visas for purposes such as business, studies, tourism, work, and family reunions, should the need arise. Global Times editorial last week emphasized India’s commitment to de-colonization and self-reliance. It applauded India’s efforts to remove vestiges of colonial authority, such as renaming iconic buildings and limiting English usage. The article advised India to focus on its national strengths rather than seeking legitimacy through techniques and accolades from outside sources. Rational interpretation to ‘outside sources’ would be India’s multi-nodal foreign policy engagement with western powers. While congratulatory editorial in Global Times is in order, its caution against Western manipulation is old communist line seeking exclusive engagement with India. Global Times asking India to embrace the Eastern Wisdom is possibly a benign attempt to wean India away into its fold. Its emphasis on ‘mutual success’ of China and India is yet another line that many in India’s Left and centrist political discourse also subscribe to. The editorial does not mince words while warning India to stay away from US with the standard communist dogma that US was fueling enemity between India and China. In this context, there are big questions that Chinese communist leadership will have to come up with plausible and convincing answers. President Xi Jingping and his cronies may have to come straight on Galvan border mis-adventurism that led to troop’s deployment on either side of Indo-Chinese borders. China will have to offer an explanation on its collaboration with Pakistan on terrorism in the United Nations (UN) and mutual prosperity pitch with India which may not go hand in hand. Continued expansionist bids in Eastern Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh, opposition to G20 conferences in Indian state Arunachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, providing Chinese names to Indian cities and towns is something that China will have to justify. Can this be the template for China’s Paradigm of mutual success? Tsinghua University’s Center for International Security and Strategy in 2022 report on “Chinese Outlook on International Security” has toed a different line on India. The study has bracketed India on par with US vis-à-vis threat posed to Chinese interests. India’s threat to China has also been compared what was perceived in Japan vis-à-vis China even today. China has come up openly on its stand towards India rather than sending out mixed signals that confuse its communist cadres and their counterparts in India. Global Times editorial also said, “In Chinese society, few people believe that India’s economic and social development will become a threat to China. The vast majority of people believe that the two countries can succeed together. We hope India can demonstrate more clarity and confidence in its dealings with China and the West.” In last three years, India’s position on Chinese threat perception has been consistent. It has in no uncertain terms said on more than one occasion that threat from China has risen multifold. Global Times editorial exhorting India to stay away from Western manipulations has come ahead of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Washington DC for a state visit later this month. China’s expectation that should not protect its defensive and offensive interests is rather unrealistic. India’s right to pursue an independent foreign and economic policy formulation, choice of friends in sync with its view seeking global peace needs to be respected. (author is operations manager at non-partisan think tank, Centre for Integrated and Holistic Studies based in New Delhi)

Blog Post