Transcription
Sometimes Singapore is known as India's cleanest city because it has such a large, you know, population of expatriates who live there. Now, there's been, you know, a lot of sort of criticism about China, uh, of it having this Middle Kingdom complex, you know, that we are the emperors. So, how do they look at a democracy like ours?
But I want to ask you about Xi Jinping. I mean, he's a very powerful leader. He's, you know, he's made himself the president for life, in a sense. Now, how would somebody like him, so powerful, you know, his sending his troops across the long border that he has with India? Doesn't he understand this would that this would upset Indians and that basically that 1.2 billion Indians are now deeply distrustful of his country? I mean, that is, I, I, you know, as I said once again, uh, on the border issue, I, I do not know. The fact is, isn't it common sense that somebody? But, but I, but I, I can tell you that. And and I think, um, the one small suggestion I have is that when it comes to geopolitics, Indians get very emotional. Don't get emotional. Please, please, never, never get emotional. We get emotional about, for everything.
Fore speech. Fore, but Ambassador, let me ask you this. I mean, the Chinese are sitting on Indian territory, have been for the last six or seven months in Ladakh. You know that Indian and Chinese soldiers may not be eyeball to eyeball, but they're separated by, you know, two or 300 meters. Now, how do you expect India to be part of a, of a big trading organization when the, the other big power, China, is sitting on your own territory?
You know, I want to mention, uh, India's problems with China are serious but fairly recent. Vietnam has been a neighbor of China for 2,000 years. Right? Vietnam was occupied by China for 1,000 years. Vietnam fought a war with China more recently than India has. There were at least half a million Vietnamese soldiers fighting half a million, uh, Chinese soldiers in the 1979 war. India has not had that big a war. Right? Until 1979, the most, one of the most heavily militarized borders in the world was the Vietnam-China border. You want to talk of difficulties with China? Ask the Vietnamese.
Now, fast forward today. Yeah. Which country is the number one trading partner of, uh, uh, of Vietnam? It's China. And by the way, Vietnam claims that China is occupying islands that belong to Vietnam in the South China Sea. Look, I, I'm, I'm telling you all this because in geopolitics, if you think there's a perfect black and white solution, there's no such thing in geopolitics. You have to learn to live with imperfections. So, the Vietnamese are obviously very unhappy, uh, with what China is doing in the South China Sea to them. But at the same time, they want to grow their economy and they said, "Okay, I'll put this aside. I'll focus on growing the economy." So, you, one thing about Indians is that they expect the world to be black and white. It is not black and white. Why do you, everybody, and because that we all learn to live and work with countries that we may not necessarily like or agree with, because that's the way.
Why do you say that Prime Minister Modi likes the world to be black and white? Or why does India like the world to be black and white? Uh, I, I didn't say Prime Minister Modi likes. India. India. That's clear. And, and by the way, the, the, the one leader who has spent more time with Xi Jinping than any other leader is Prime Minister Modi. That's right. I give him a lot of credit for that. And indeed, my Indian friends told me, he said, "Kishaw, there's no leader that, no two leaders in the world have spent as much time together as Prime Minister Modi and President Xi Jinping." You look at it mathematically. Uh, so I, I don't say that about, uh, uh, Prime Minister Modi.
Now, let, on the border question, let me tell you, I'm not an expert, okay? I don't know the details. But I do know that Prime Minister Modi has said categorically, okay, on record, that there are no Chinese forces on Indian territory. He has said that. So, the question is, if Prime Minister Modi says it, I believe it. Right. Right. So, so in that case, it's a bit of an impasse, isn't it? We know that, you know, whether or not Prime Minister Modi was trying to finesse the situation because there are probably talks ongoing talks with the on this question. Uh, there, there is a difference about the border, the Line of Actual Control. I mean, all that aside, but the question is, at the moment, there is an impasse. How does one? There, there has been an impasse for a long time. And as you know, uh, you know, when I was dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, every year we would invite senior retired Indian officials and senior retired Chinese officials to come and talk in the Lee Kuan Yew School. And by the way, the net result is something you should, you should really ask your viewers to look at. Look at this, the Rout Handbook of India-China Relations. See how thick it is, right? The reason I tell you why this is important is because this is a very complex relationship. And some of the world's best professors, this book just came out two, three months ago, by the way, and it is a very complex relationship. There are many dimensions to it. Don't just focus on one dimension. The border clearly is a problem. And as you know, and this is what Indians told me, at least three times, the Chinese leaders, Zhou Enlai, Deng Xiaoping, proposed to India and said, "We are not going to change the border. Why don't we accept the Line of Control and live with it?" And as you know, this is a fact, India did not accept that offer. But in, there were, there were opportunities in the past to deal with this. And I still believe that there are ways and means of dealing, uh, with border disputes. And a little, you must, in a complex relationship like this, you don't hold everything hostage to one issue.
I think a little bit of an update on those earlier proposals between say, Deng Xiaoping and Rajiv Gandhi or Zhou Enlai and Nehru, even before. Is that in 2005, when Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was Prime Minister of India, there were, there was, um, an agreement of guiding principles, is that how to resolve the border between the two countries? But then a couple of years later, the Chinese withdrew from that. And subsequently, there has been, you know, keep having these talks between special representatives, but nothing comes of it. The Chinese refuse to even exchange maps. So, if you don't even exchange maps, then how are you going to resolve something as complex as this?
Yeah, as I told you, Ji, I, I'm not an expert on the China-India port. You do know, if you want, if you want to talk to an expert, Kanti Bajpai, the editor of this volume, is, is amazing in his knowledge. And, and you're right, uh, I agree with you that the Chinese have made mistakes. I mean, no question whatsoever, uh, in the management of the border issue. But I'm saying, only point I'm making is that there are hundreds of issues between China and India, and you got to, you got to focus on the whole picture and not on one dimension. And which is why I gave the example of Vietnam. Vietnam is very unhappy, uh, with China and about the, the way its islands are, uh, occupied. But at the same time, it doesn't hold that entire relation hostage to because of one issue.
So, in that sense, when you said that the ASEAN is deeply disappointed, so India's, you know, Act East Policy, that also then comes under some stress, doesn't it? Uh, yes. I mean, the, I, what I, what I liked about the difference between the Look East Policy and the Act East Policy was that I like the word "act" rather than "look." Acting is better than looking. So, but the tragedy is that, uh, India has not done much, uh, in terms of its act, uh, policy. And like, by the way, India will be welcomed with open arms in Southeast Asia. And, you know, by the way, you should know this, Southeast Asians love India. So, it's important for Indians to know this. But you got to do much more. And, and, and, and, and, and, and one, if you don't mind, I'll make a, a difficult point to you. The India is right when it says when you sign a free trade agreement, you get a range of cheap imports, right? But that's also part of what, uh, economic free market theory is all about. You must have creative destruction. Creat, without creative destruction, you don't have economic growth. So, if you want to preserve your current industries, which are uncompetitive, then you are actually hobbling up your own economy. So, but, but, but when, when you, when you, when you open up, when you sign free trade agreements, there are other markets that open up and other new industries, uh, come up. And what is shocking is that Indians in the United States are setting up new companies faster than anybody else in the United States. Is, and Indians in India cannot set up new companies as fast as Indians overseas. Why is that the case? Right? So, I, Indians can succeed. I mean, I, it's, you know, I, my first book was called "Can Asians Think?" And I can tell you, at the end of the day, competition is about cultural confidence. You must say, "I can compete." And that's what the Indians have shown anywhere in the world. I mean, look at Singapore. Amazing how well the Indians have done. You're only 15% of the population. Yeah. Amazingly successful. Right.
Sometimes Singapore is known as India's cleanest city because it has such a large, you know, population of expatriates who live there. But no more, more, more than that, a friend of mine, uh, who was a very successful Indian entrepreneur in, uh, United States, wanted to go back and live in India. So, he went to, he said, Kolkata, Mumbai, Delhi, Chennai. He looked at all the cities and he decided the best city in India is Singapore. This is what he said. He said, "I can fly from Singapore to any Indian city more effectively because I can get to the airport in 10 minutes in Singapore, right? Mumbai, I don't know how long it takes. I can get to the airport in 10 minutes. One hour. Book. I'm, I'm flying already to India." So, but let me come back. Yeah. Functionally, India is an Indian. Singapore is an Indian city. That's right. So, let me. So, you know, so let me ask you, Ambassador Mehra, you, you know, you know China well. I mean, this latest book of yours and, and earlier as well. Now, how do the Chinese look at, uh, India? You two big powers, two Asian powers. Now, there's been, you know, a lot of sort of criticism about China, uh, of it having this Middle Kingdom complex, you know, that we are the emperors. So, how do they look at a democracy like ours?
Well, uh, I think China would, would love to live in peace, uh, with India for another 2,000 years. Because I mean, for most of the 2,000 years, when India first emerged as a great civilization and China emerged as a great civilization, the Chinese regarded Indian, Indian civilization as one that is equal to Chinese civilization, and they have a lot of respect, uh, for Indian civilization. But they don't want to live as equals. Surely, they want. They'd be happy. They'd be happy to live, uh, as equals. And, and it's funny, it's funny you should say that because, as to the best of my knowledge, I may be mistaken about some of the southern Indian kingdoms, they may have paid tribute to China. But by and large, India has never paid tribute to China. Whereas, uh, by the way, Vietnam has paid tribute to China. The Southeast Asian countries have paid tribute to China. Uh, Korea has paid tribute to China. Japan, in its, in a very different, subtle way, has paid tribute to China. So, I don't understand why Indians are obsessed about this question of being, uh, paying tribute to China, because you never paid tribute to China.
But at the end of the day, the most important thing that India needs to do is to go back to 1980. Now, what do I mean by 1980? In 1980, the size of the Indian economy was the same size as the Chinese economy. Right? Same. 40 years ago, it's exactly the same size. 40 years later, China's economy is five times bigger. Now, I would say that if you really want to make compete in this game, make your economy five times bigger. And you can do that because, you know why? The reason why you can do that is that you have 1.3 billion very talented Indians around the world. They die. And you know what is shocking? But India being frightened to open up its economy to compete. Actually, the rest of the world should be frightened of 1.3 billion Indians because 1.3 billion Indians, if you look at what 1 million Indians have done in California, it's amazing, right? And you know that if, if Indians in India can achieve half the per capita income, right, of what the, of Indians in, uh, United States, you would have by far the world's largest economy, by far.
But I want to ask you about Xi Jinping. I mean, he's a very powerful leader. He's, you know, he's made himself the president for life, in a sense. Now, how would somebody like him, so powerful, you know, his sending his troops across the long border that he has with India? Doesn't he understand this would that this would upset Indians and that basically that 1.2 billion Indians are now deeply distrustful of his country? I mean, that is, I, I, you know, as I said once again, uh, on the border issue, I, I do not know. The fact is, is it common sense that somebody? But, but I, but I, I can tell you that, uh, Xi Jinping really wanted to work out a long-term, uh, understanding with India. And I can tell you that I'm pretty sure that Xi Jinping has a lot of respect for Prime Minister Modi, genuine respect. Uh, and I, I think that's why the two of them were able to get along each other. And you're right when you say that Xi Jinping is a strong leader. But I would say that Narendra Modi is also a very strong leader in India. So, it's not a case of a strong leader against a weak leader. There are two strong leaders here, Xi Jinping, uh, and Modi. And if you ask me what should happen now, I think they should try and resume, uh, the conversations that they had in the past and try and find out what went wrong. Uh, from what I'm told, there was an accident. Nobody wanted this to happen, right? From what I'm told. And, and, and, and the accidents happen because they came too close.
So, my, this Gandhi Bajpai wrote an, I, I've started something called the Asian Peace Program, uh, at the National University of Singapore, and I'm the coordinator of it. And the first essay was written by Kanti Bajpai soon after the border incident. And he said the reason why the accident happened is because the Indian and Chinese soldiers had to meet face to face with each other to figure out the clash in June that you're talking about. That's right. That's right. So, he says, why not take away the, the soldiers? Put virtual sensors in at all the sensitive points, and both sides have a common set of computers looking at the same sensors, and the computers will then talk to each other and say, "Why are you in this? Why are you in that?" And there's no more physical confrontations, uh, at the border. So, you can use technology, uh, to solve, uh, some of these problems. And by the way, there are things called best practices, right? In other, uh, difficult, uh, borders, you know, that, that I know. So, the India-China border is not the only difficult border in the world. There are other borders, and you can learn best practices from other borders. And I would say Kanti Bajpai's suggestion is an excellent suggestion that should be taken seriously by both China and India.
So, could a couple of questions, uh, Ambassador? The first is that the Quad that has come into shape, which is India, Australia, Japan, uh, and Korea. Now, how does China look at these? I'm sorry, India, US, Japan, and Australia. Sorry about that. How does the US look at this Quad, especially when, you know, the world's most powerful country, the Americans, are very much part of it, part of this, um, and, and expanding into its maritime domain?
Well, I mean, the one lesson I've learned in geopolitics is that, uh, no country, no great power will sacrifice its own interests for another power. So, for example, uh, if the United States reaches a new understanding with China, right, under the new administration, yeah, the Biden administration, and if the United States has to sacrifice, uh, other countries, it will do so. You know, there's no such thing as friendship. And, you know, if you want to know, uh, uh, ask any country what friendship with, with the United States is like. Ask Pakistan in the Cold War. You know, Brzezinski went to the border and said, "We Pakistanis, Afghans, and the United States, we are together," and so on and so forth. They were very close, you know, very close. The Cold War ended, Pakistan was dropped, boom. And then 9/11 happened. Oh, boom, Pakistan became a friend again, right? So, geopolitics is cruel. Has nothing to do with sentiment, nothing to do with love, nothing to do with values, nothing to do with ideology. It only has to do with interests, right? And where there's convergence of interest, there'll be cooperation. So, and for example, you mentioned the Quad. I think Australia is going through a very difficult time, uh, as you know. Mhm. And, uh, and I suspect that Australia will go through a more difficult time in the coming months because Australia unwisely decided to slap China in the face by calling for an international public inquiry into what China did on COVID-19. It's true. China made mistakes on COVID-19. No question whatsoever. But, you know, you know, you want to ask for something, do it quietly. Don't, don't embarrass China publicly. But by slapping China in the face, they made China lose face. And for Chinese and Asians, losing face is a serious business. So, as you know, uh, China has quietly, steadily increased the pressure on the Australian economy. So, I think you will find that ch Australia will become, uh, it will be in a much tougher spot, uh, in the coming months. And then, if you look at Japan, I want you to know that the Chinese foreign minister just had a very successful visit to Japan, right? And, and I'm telling you all this just to make a simple point. It's very complex. It's not black and white, right? That, and, and certainly in the case of the Biden administration, if the Biden administration doesn't want to be, Martin Wolf said in the Financial Times that the Biden administration could be an interlude between two Trump administrations unless Biden fixes the problem. And the United States of America is the only major developed country where the average income of the bottom 50% has gone down over a 30-year period. And as I explained in my book, "As China Won," I, I devote a whole chapter to it. The United States has become a plutocracy. So, the United States is a very unhappy country. And the United, Biden is going to focus on the internal, uh, economic development of, uh, United States. And if he can work with the second largest economy to do it, I think he may or may not do it depending on various factors. But they will, Americans will go by where their interests lie. And as you know, the best thing that United States could do to, to, for India is to restore the Generalized Scheme of Preferences that Trump took away. That did a lot of damage to the Indian economy, right? And restore the H1B visas that was suspended from for India, right? So, and why did even though Donald Trump is a friend of India, why did he do that? It proves my point. Countries will go with their own interest. Friendship means nothing.
So, if the US and China, if the Biden administration believes that it must reach out to China, then what happens to other members of the Quad, like India, for example?
Well, I would say, you know, um, each member of the Quad will be working out its own long-term relationship with China. Mhm. In one way or another. And, uh, so I don't think, I mean, again, you know, the Australians send soldiers in, they were very, they must say, they're very, the Australians are very brave people. They went to fight in Europe in World War I. They went to fight in Europe in World War II. Right. And because they feel this cultural affinity with the, the British and the Europeans. Now, let's say, uh, if there's a conflict in South Asia, would Australia come to fight in South Asia? Very unlikely. No, very unlikely. So, and I think, uh, and also vice versa, you know, if there's a conflict between Australia and someone, I don't sure whether India will go and, you know, because countries have to decide where their interests lie. And, and, and I think, uh, the one small suggestion I have is that when it comes to geopolitics, Indians get very emotional. Don't get emotional. Please, please, never, never get emotional. You think we get emotional about, oh, everything. Uh, you, you know, you like, you know, like your relations with China, you get very emotional. Why don't you sit down and co, do a cold calculation on how you can use this relationship to your advantage rather than to your disadvantage? Because, you know, you, there are various Indian strategic thinkers like Kautilya and all that. And what do they emphasize? You got to be brutally cold and calculating in, in, in what you are doing and figure out the, the best thing to do. And, and so, then, and come up with various options. And, and don't get emotional about it.
So, Kautilya is a favorite philosopher these days. In your view, what do you think India should do now? Or what do you think Prime Minister Modi's government should do?
Well, I think the, the, the number one, the game, the big game today is no longer military. The big game today is economic. And the countries with the largest economies will have the largest amount of influence. And let me give you one statistic which every Indian should know. In the year 2009, 10 years ago, the size of the retail goods market in China was $1.8 trillion. The size of the retail goods market in the United States was $4 trillion. 2009. Right? More than double China's retail goods market. Fast forward 10 years, 2019, China's retail goods market had gone up to $6 trillion. Three times in 10 years. United States went up to 5.5. The retail goods market in the United States. Now it's smaller than China. 10 years from now, China will be much bigger than the United States. Now, look at all the 191 other countries in the world, leaving aside United States, uh, uh, United States, China, India. Leave out 90 countries, 19 member states, India. If you are one of the members of the 190, 190 countries, and you are looking to grow your economy, the best way to grow your economy is to find the biggest market in the world and go and sell your goods. And that's how China succeeded. China used the United States market, which was far bigger than the Chinese market, to grow its economy. And today, lots of other countries, including Vietnam, they are all using the Chinese market to grow their economies. Right. Right. And, and so, you see, and, and so the game, so what, in to compete in this game, India must grow its retail goods market to be one of the biggest in the world. That's, that's the game. Now, it's not about how many aircraft carriers you have, how many jet fighters you have. That's not the nature of the game anymore. It's about the size of your retail goods market.
So, last question, uh, Professor Mehra, this is, we're, we're in a sense with the Biden administration now in power. Um, you have sort of various centers of power. You have Washington DC, you have Beijing, you know, India, of course, much, much smaller. But would you say that this churning that there is, once again, going to be another churn? And how do you see this play out, for example, in South Asia? China is expanding its influence, you know, with Nepal and Sri Lanka, Pakistan, of course, you know, they're very, very close. But how do you see this churn play out?
Well, I would say in South Asia, uh, I would recommend that Indians should read my book, "The ASEAN Miracle," and I see that quite seriously, it very, very seriously, because the level of trust in Southeast Asia among the Southeast Asian countries in the 1970s was the same as the level of trust between India and Pakistan, India and Bangladesh, and India and Sri Lanka, whatever it is. Very, relatively low levels of trust. But we built it up through ASEAN. So, I believe that the, the best way.
So, know, for example, Singapore is not worried that, uh, China is building a railway between Jakarta and Bandung. It's okay. But you don't have the problem of cross-border terrorism that India has from Pakistan. That's a big issue, isn't it? Yes, of course, of course. It's a big issue. I completely agree with you. And terrorism is completely, uh, uh, uh, unacceptable. But again, it's a question of, there's a vicious circle here, and we got to transform, uh, the vicious circle. And, you know, that Indonesia, uh, carried out a policy of confrontation against Singapore and Malaysia. That Indonesian Marines, uh, set off bombs, uh, in Orchard Road in Singapore that killed Singaporeans. So, we did have a terrorist attack from Indonesia. But after that, we settled, and we worked out, uh, our relationship. And today, the level of trust within Singapore and Indonesia is amazing. I mean, absolutely amazing. And look, look at Singapore. Singapore is this anglicized, English-speaking country, full of Chinese. 75% Chinese. In Indonesians distrust the Chinese, right? They don't like the Chinese community. Guess what? Indonesia and Singapore are very good friends. So, if Indonesia and Singapore, which are so different, and that I can apply that, by the way, Indonesia and, and Malaysia, or Thailand and Singapore.
How do India and China regain a sense of trust that existed before the Ladakh crisis?
Well, I, I would say both sides, uh, have to work at it. And I would say that the, I spent 33 years in diplomacy, and the one lesson I learned from diplomacy is that you must learn to talk to your adversaries. And I can tell you, I had shouting matches. Shouting. I used to shout at the Vietnamese, uh, ambassador to the UN, and the Vietnamese ambassador used to shout at me when we were fighting each other. Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia. Then the occupation of Cambodia, and it ended in 1990. Five years later, we brought Vietnam into ASEAN. So, I want to emphasize that you can have a relationship of great adversity and overcome it. That's why come to Southeast Asia. Southeast Asia is a miracle. It's amazing. And we've shown the way. And how did we do that? You know something? It was because Lee Kuan Yew and Suharto met face to face. And you could not have two individuals who were so far apart in their mindset. Lee Kuan Yew was an, was an anglicized, British-trained lawyer. His mind was completely Western. Suharto was, his mind was set in Hindu mythology, right? Javanese through and through. He didn't speak English. So, this Javanese Hindu mind could interact with this anglicized British mind and come together by talking to each other. So, never, never give up talking to your adversaries. Never.
For speech. For speech. Fore speech. Fore! Foreign! Foreign!