Transcription
There are certainly uh domestic uh industry concerns in India that China is swallowing up uh the Indian market, swallowing up the Indian industry that this is a kind of new imperialism. How would you respond to those concerns?
Because okay, the one thing that China is not open about, you know, when you're suggesting that India's economy should be open and and and to to to be protectionist is actually protecting vested interests. What about democracy? What about uh what about political and you know civil liberties? And I asked this because there's a huge question around for example China's treatments of of of of its Muslim population and this is a a story that never even gets addressed, never even gets spoken about. And I think many Indians if you don't mind me saying this can be very naive about geopolitics. Geopolitics is not about friendship. Geopolitics is not about whether they like you or love you. Geopolitics is all about what's in my interest and that's what they will do in you know in international affairs uh I always believe that the biggest problem is when you get emotional right and uh if Pakistan was a complete vessel state of China, why does it go to the IMF when it needs assistance right is a vessel state of China. It should say to hell with the IMF, to hell with all that. I mean, that doesn't make sense.
Says China wants to push India into a war and then it will crush India. There is a sense what you call the marathon the marathon competition on between India and China. There is there is a sense that there's room for only one winner here, right? And the best you know if you can imagine a seessaw okay on one side the seesaw is China on the other side the seesaw is United States right the seesaw is going like this what's the best position for India to be in in the middle so wherever India puts his foot the seesaw goes that way and guess what both United States and China will be super nice to India that's about being cunning.
What you just heard was an exchange between renowned Indian journalist Barka Dut and veteran and Singaporean diplomat, Professor Keshor Mahbubani. This full conversation took place in December of 2020, just months after India and China had engaged in their deadliest border clash in decades. Against this tense backdrop, an interrogation over how India should deal with China began. In the content that follows, you will witness an extraordinary dialogue. The host will repeatedly question from the perspective of India's national sentiment, territorial sovereignty and security anxieties whether China is an expansionist and untrustworthy neighbor. Professor Machbubani in response will use his signature cold-blooded realism to try again and again to pull the conversation away from emotion and back to interests. He will use the wisdom of Vietnam, the hypocrisy of the West, and the success stories of Southeast Asia to offer India a completely different strategic framework. Is this a feudal dialogue of the deaf or a dose of thoughtprovoking bitter medicine? This is a rare and deep conversation that helps us understand the complex psychology behind the India China relationship. Let's continue.
Uh but yes, from an Indian perspective, you've seen the Chinese apps that have been banned. Uh you've seen the kind of cold freeze in relations. There's definitely a view uh on on the Chinese aggress, you know, aggression and incursion. And I'm just asking you to uh contextualize how you think the return of Asia is possible with our countries at loggerheads.
Well, you're you're absolutely right. Uh I think if India and China go at loggerheads with each other then the Asian century is gone. It's gone. Yeah. Finish. And so it's very important that China and India get their relations right. And as you know all of Asia wants China and India to get their their relations right. And it's important for China and India to step back and ask themselves what is really really important to their people today. Is it really that important whether you succeed in getting a few hund few few square miles of territory at the border or is it more important for both your countries to do well? And so if both countries can step back and say okay we have more important issues to do and there are ways and means of diffusing uh these issues. So and I hope that both sides uh will make an effort to try and diffuse the issues. But as you know, the reason why this problem has happened for for 2,000 years, one reason why China and India lived in peace is because the Himalayas were so formidable. There's no way that armies could cross the Himalayas. It's impossible. They were massive. But today with modern technology, both sides can build roads up to the up to the limit. Both sides can have helicopter flights to the close to each other. And that's how this friction uh is happening over a territory that is uh contested by by both sides. So it's very important that both sides make a huge effort to say how important is the border issue relative to other issues and that's what I would encourage both sides to do.
But you know as a diplomat you can make that comment but uh but as you would know from having having served at the highest levels of of of government uh in your own country a government can only uh can only act in response to public opinion and what you call a sort of a few square miles of territory would would be India defining uh you know its territorial integrity. Countries have gone to war for rest. Uh so I I just don't feel as sanguin as you do about India and China getting into the same lane. I think at the moment they're not even on parallel lanes. They're on coll they're on a possible collision course. Things may have quietened down. Uh but we came very very near to a military escalation and we still have hundreds of thousands of troops eyeball to eyeball and and how do we look away from that fact?
And if you were talking to friends in India, what is it that you'd be saying to them?
Well, I uh I I would say learn from best examples uh from all over the world and uh you know, India of course has uh only recently uh fought a war with China in 1962. Let me give you the example of Vietnam. Vietnam has been in one way or another fighting China for 2,000 years. Vietnam was occupied by China 1,000 years. Uh the biggest war that's been fought in recent years was between China and Vietnam where you had a few hundred,000 soldiers fighting each other. And then from 1979 to 1990, that was the most militarized border in the world and full of mines and artillery and everything. Now that was 1990. Today you go to the border, there are no mines. There is no artillery. There are no more few hundred thousand troops. It doesn't mean Vietnam and China have fallen in love with each other. I can assure you the Vietnamese are as distrustful of the Chinese as they have been for 2,000 years. But now that border is the one of the most heavily traded borders in the world. So it is possible to go from a situation where you've been enemies and you've had few hundred thousand soldiers who actually not not just face each other but fight each other as recently as 1979 and today you have a border that is frankly one of the most peaceful borders in the world even after by the way Vietnam claims that China has stolen some islands from Vietnam. You see?
So yeah, I I no I see I see the I see the larger point of of of what you're saying but I want to pick up on on on trade right you spoke about this being one of the most traded borders in the world. Now when you talk about trade between India and China, there are people who will point to the trade deficit. India has chosen to stay out of the REP agreement, the regional uh free trade agreement that it was negotiating in fact uh to be part of and then because of what's happened at the border. I think that had a big impact on it. But there are also those who see China's uh economic policies as predatory. You've heard that that language in fact used by by people who served in the Trump administration. There are certainly uh domestic uh industry concerns in India that China is swallowing up uh the Indian market, swallowing up the Indian industry that this is a kind of new imperialism. How would you respond to those concerns? Because you mentioned trade as a defining basis of Vietnam and China and if it were to be that for India and China, I think there would be an outcry in India.
Just give me 10 seconds. I'm going to show you something. 10 seconds. Okay. Okay. Okay. So that's Kish Kishor Mehubani who's I think going to get us something. You can see his book at the shelf behind has China one uh who seems to have a very pragmatic uh sort of understanding of what he thinks India should do should do next. Just two hours ago just uh uh let me see it's 9:00 sorry uh 5 hours ago the prime minister of Singapore launched this book. Yeah. India on our minds. Right. Okay. Y and he and he spoke and you know what he said? He said we will always keep the door open for India to join the regional comprehensive economic partnership. And I can tell you everybody in East Asia would love to have India back into the regional comprehensive economic partnership. And I want to emphasize the regional comprehensive economic partnership is not one country called China. There are 15 countries in it. not just uh including some of India's best friends, Japan is there, Australia is there in the regional comprehensive economic partnership and I want to and you know if you don't I hope you don't mind if I you know I I I want India to succeed. I want India to do well. I mean I want to emphasize that. Okay. Yeah. My my my mother was a very fervent Indian nationalist. So obviously I want India to do well. But you know at the same time as a student of geopolitics for 50 years the worst thing that a country can do in the game of geopolitics is to get emotional and irrational. It's very very important to be very coldblooded and calculating in your in your analysis. And let me emphasize the one important point. The geopolitical game today is no more about aircraft carriers, fighter jets. Is not about that anymore. It's about the size of your economy. And and that's the most important thing you need to do. and and the lesson that you've seen from India's experience when did India have the biggest growth phase in the 1990s after man moan Singh and Montek Singh Alwalia opened up your economy right and look what happened you became a tiger right right so the Indians are the most competitive economic animals in the world Indians can compete anywhere in the world and you see that in United States the most competitive uh laboratory country in the world is the is is United States of America which is the most successful ethnic community in United States is the ethnic Indian community. So clearly what you need to do the lesson that we have learned is you have to open up your economy and compete even if you have a short-term uh pain you get long-term gain and and competition capitalism is about creative destruction and if you prevent creative destruction you prevent long-term growth so I'm being very brutal about this because at the end and no no at the end of the day India can compete I have great confidence India can compete and you know you mentioned the RC that you know out of 15 countries you have problem with one country you can negotiate a bilateral safeguards agreement and I think you can work something out with with China to do that but you have the other 14 countries that still want to trade with you.
Okay let me let me let me let me be a bit provocative you know we had a comment on our live stream saying that it's like modern colonialism uh and and I and I remind you and since you mentioned that your mother was a fervent Indian nationalist uh that that the British uh project of India started with the East India Company. So trade is often the precursor to a certain kind. Now no one is suggesting that this is going to be territorial capture but there is a there is a sense in India of the capture of of of the markets by China right uh and and I think that while you can say be cold be brutal any Indian government has to be mindful of what's happening to its own economy there is no country in the world that doesn't have elements of some protectionism I mean there's what China is doing with Australia for example right there there there are tariff wars between China and Australia as well so is it as simple as you make it sound
Okay. Uh uh you know I'm I'm right it's very good to be very frank you know are you protecting the poor people of India are you protecting the rich people of India and I I will argue with you that in India's refusal to join the RC and I'll be very brutal about this is because you have some very rich vested interests that will suffer and so you have you have a choice if you want to help the poor people of India and and by the way the record of is you know you know I want to emphasize you there's 650 million people in Southeast Asia you know the the country that has been the most successful at poverty reduction in the entire human history is Vietnam Vietnam was at war for 50 years okay nonstop 50 years 1939 to 1989 and then it stopped you know what Vietnam did Vietnam opened up its economy. Vietnam integrated with the rest of the world. Vietnam accepted the creative destruction and and I can tell you the World Bank president Kim said no country has reduced poverty as fast as uh uh Vietnam has. So forget China, why doesn't India look at other countries? Look at Indonesia. Indonesia's population is 250 million, right? Indonesia by the way is was far behind India in economic development and guess what they opened up and they're growing right so that the lesson is very clear you are you going to protect a few vested interests who are very very prosperous or are you going to help the bottom 50% in India and you want to help the bottom 50% in India forget China learn from Vietnam Vietnam is a good friend of India okay.
The one thing that China is not open about you know when you're suggesting that India's economy should be open and and and to to to be protectionist is actually protecting vested interests what about democracy what about uh what about political and you know civil liberties and I asked this because there's a huge question around for example China's treatments of of of of its Muslim population and this is a a story that never even gets addressed never even gets spoken about we saw a shocking story on Alazer this week which which spoke about you know Muslims in internment camps being forced to eat pork every Friday as part of what's called re-education. Do civil liberties not matter at all? When it comes to India, the whole world comments. When it comes to China, everybody's quiet.
Uh well, I think as you know, India was very upset when Prime Minister Trudeau uh yesterday uh made some comments about Yeah. And uh and and I think we in Asia are wiser than the west is. And you know just to put in a big historical context you know I I I you know I've been a student of the west for a long time the west has lost its political domination. It has lost its economic domination. He only now has intellectual domination and he preserves his intellectual domination by lecturing the whole world on human rights issues when the west as you know is completely hypocritical on human rights issues. I'll give you a simple example. The European countries will condemn any country that carries out torture. Right? If India carries out water boarding, the European countries will be the first to insist that India stops water boarding. But when the United States was the first major developed country to reintroduce torture, the European countries kept absolutely quiet. So on human rights, it's okay for NOS's to speak about it because NOS's like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, they're completely objective, neutral, and they don't carry agenda of anybody. But whenever any government tries to criticize any country on human rights, I say they've got double standards because they will only criticize their adversaries and not their friends. And just you know since you mentioned how bad the human rights situation is in China, you know in the 1971 when United States was fighting the evil Soviet empire, it had a choice. He could either join the world's largest democracy in India to fight the Soviet Union or he could fight the the largest communist government in the world which by the way under Mao saw far greater human rights uh abusers than anything you have in China today. Right? Far greater. And you know what the great democracy United States chose China over India. And I think many Indians, if you don't mind me saying this, can be very naive about geopolitics. Joe politics is not about friendship. Joe politics is not about whether they like you or love you. Geopolitics is all about what's in my interest and that's what they will do. And so I think it's important to you know as you know as you know the the European Union also wanted to impose human rights standards on India also. So it's that's what they've been doing all the time. So it's important in geopolitics we as I said calculate what is in your interest and do what's in your interests.
But what what happens then to civil liberties?
I actually agree with you. I agree with you on the one point that you make that a lot of commentary by the western world is full of him humbug and full of hypocrisy. I mean I remember this time for example when Obama was on a presidential visit to India and before going he made a lot of comments about the need constitutional sort of need to preserve pluralism in India which of course is all true but then he took the flight from here to Saudi Arabia where he didn't say anything of the kind. So one does see all of these gaping double standards but when you think of and I agree with you on that but when you think of these Muslims and internment camps in China and you hear the horror stories that come out should the world look the other way and there are things for example when you look back at let's say apartheid and Africa there have been moments in history when global pressure has pushed change so you know is it is is your binary really uh sort of always applicable
No no I I by the I want to emphasize that we should advance human rights. Yeah. Because you know what? I don't want to live in a country where my nails are being pulled out. You know, I don't like that. Yeah. And and but just since you mentioned appetite, I mean, you must surely know the reason why the appetite regime was so resilient and could survive so many years is because United States and United Kingdom supported South Africa. I mean, I hope you know that. Of course. And you know and you know the enormous pressure on that from the Commonwealth to actually impose those sanctions. But yeah and you know and you know that the United States Congress declared Nelson Mandela a terrorist and do you know that they they only removed the terrorist title six years after apatite ended? I mean look look at that. Look at that. So you tell me that United States is a defender of of of human United.
I don't care about the United States. I'm just asking how how the world should react. The world is not the United States.
True. Uh true. But uh uh uh uh but at the same time I completely agree with you. But as you know if if someone came to India and lectured India publicly and say why did you tear down the mosque you know uh why do you do all that? you know, you know, everyone's going to react very badly. But if I want to tell a friend of mine, right, hey, I think you're doing something wrong. If I broadcast it in the media, he's not going to change. But I know if I talk to him privately and try to talk to him, things will change. And and I have seen in my lifetime so many countries where the human right situation has improved dramatically. And again I'm sorry I'm going to go back to Indonesia. You know in 1965 the estimates of the number of people killed after the coup is a few million right few million. Okay now guess what look at Indonesia today how it has improved and you know how it has improved and you want to know the real story. They know what they elected a president SBY who studied in the US in a in a military college and he learned the most important lesson. The role of the military is to be subservient to the civilian government and Indonesia which was a militaryrun government right for many years like Pakistan okay suddenly changed and and and how will that change happen it's through quiet persuasion and through peer pressure so all this grandstanding on chinang is not going to get you anywhere but if you want to change Chinese behavior on on on on on chinang and I would Say frankly if it's about Muslims don't you think the Muslim countries should take the lead how is it that the western when the western countries wrote a letter criticizing China not one Muslim country supported that letter not one so it's better for the Muslims to go to China quietly talk to China quietly and see what can be done and I and I believe that such quiet persuasion can make a difference and I give you another example okay since many of your viewers may not Believe me, for so many years, the West put sanction after sanction after sanction on Myanmar. What happened? Nothing. Zero. What did ASEAN do? Assan said no sanctions. We will welcome Myanmar. Come join our family. But you know after joining ASEAN Myanmar went from being a Syria right towards becoming a a reasonably stable well balanced state today with no major civil wars. That's amazing. I mean it's not perfect but look at the transformation that we have done. So what how do we do this? And I can tell you the Indonesian foreign minister who who brought in Myanmar said the only way to do so to transform people is to talk to them privately. So I would say talk to the Chinese privately. Don't join the west in grandstanding.
But you know when you speak about the silence of the Muslim countries, one of the countries of the world that has remained silent is Pakistan. Right. Yes. uh and from a and from an Indian perspective uh Pakistan now is seen almost as a kind of vassal state uh of China and so when these border tensions uh in fact erupted uh one of the things that the Indian military had to war game was for a possible two-front conflict and it's always war game for that but there's a kind of uh you know Pakistan sort of being seen as a continuum of China how do you see that relationship obviously for China it's all about self-interest for any nation it's its choices are about self interest there I agree with you but from an Indian perspective we're looking at this we're looking at Pakistan occupied Kashmir we're looking at the sort of you know one board one road project and we're and we're going Pakistan is just like now an addendum almost an addendum to China
Well um um you know in in in in you know in international affairs uh I always believe that the biggest problem is when you get emotional, right? And uh if Pakistan was a complete vessel state of China, why does it go to the IMF when it needs assistance, right? It's a vessel state of China. It should say to hell with the IMF, to hell with all that. I mean, that doesn't make sense. And so I would say that you know it's it's a big mistake to use labels. Okay. And and and and and and it's also important to ask yourself again if you don't mind me being very frank.
No, no, please.
Southeast Asia had as many divisions as South Asia has today. Indonesia had a confrontasy policy against Singapore and Malaysia. Indonesia blew up a bomb in the middle of Singapore's uh financial district, killing Singaporeans, right? A terrorist act. Uh Thailand and Malaysia have fought over separatist provinces. Philippines claims a state in Malaysia. I mean, these are all still ongoing problems. By the way, you know what? Look at how we manage problems is you will always have problems between states. That's a given. The only question is how you manage those problems. Right? and and and I would say it's very important for South Asia to come to Southeast Asia and say how is this in these countries and you know the divisions in Southeast Asia are as as serious as anybody is out of 650 million people you have 250 million Muslims 150 million Christians 150 million Buddhists Hinayana Buddhist Mahana Buddhist and you have Tawis confusionist Hindus and communists Southeast Asia is the most diverse region of planet earth which Why the uh British historians calls it the Balkans of Asia and logically the cultural differences in India are nothing? Nothing. And look at me. I mean, I I grew up as a child and even till today the only reason I could write my book has China won is because I got to listen to Mohammad Rafi. And where did Mohammad Rafi born? In Rahor and I went to see his house in Lahore. Right. So you're telling me that the cultural difference between Pakistan and and in India is that great? Come on. So if if if is Southeast Asia, right, can overcome far greater differences and the differences will be there. You can't change them. What? Don't don't believe that magically we will live in a fairy tale world where we'll all like each other a lot. No, we will never like each other. We'll be different. But it's it's it's you have to live in the real world and in the real world there are real success stories and Southeast Asia the most important thing about Southeast Asia every Indian should know and I've documented this in my book Assean Miracle nine out of the 10 Southeast Asian states have an Indic base and I can tell you in 2017 or 2016 please check when Philippines the world's largest Catholic country Philippines organized an East Asian summit and when all the presidents were there Obama and everyone and were there what did Philippines put on as a pres as a as a cultural presentation for the Philippines the Ramayana aren't you shocked the world's largest so here in Southeast Asia where you have indic cultures we are able to get along despite our differences and frankly South Asia should learn some lessons from Southeast Asia on how you manage differences because you're not going to change each other. You have to learn to accept that we are different. And by the way, you know the the Singapore and Malaysia, I can give you how g example how neurotic it can be. We were married for two years. You were one country. Then you know what? We got separated and then we continue to live in the same house. Can you imagine divorced couple living in the same house? That's Singapore and Malaysia. But you know you want you want an example of good cooperation come to Singapore and Malaysia. So we have we have real success stories. So why why does India always focus on problems of the past on differences and not focus on what can be done to learn lessons from others and and and learn to find a better way better way.
So so how do you see how do you see for example the Pakistan China equation?
Well, I think you know geopolitics as I told you earlier. Yeah. Where just as the United States chose the world's largest communist country under Maoung as a partner, countries don't care what your internal system is about. If it suits their geopolitical interests, they will work with the country. And right now there's a convergence of geopolitical interests between Pakistan and China. So that's what happens. So and just as there is by the way a convergence of geopolitical interest between India and United States today that's what's happening also and and and that but it's not driven by by the fact that they like each other or believe in each other it's about geopolitical interests but I do believe I'm going to say something that will shock you.
Go ahead. I'm pretty I'm pretty strong proof but try me. Yeah. Okay. That I can imagine a free trade agreement between China, India and Pakistan that will benefit all three countries.
That does shock me and I can't say in my I know you see exactly but what I what I describe to you is what has happened in East Asia. China and Vietnam are far greater adversaries. Far greater adversaries. And look at the look look at the trade between Vietnam and China today. It's amazing. So, and and at the end of the day, why is Vietnam doing this? Let me tell you what Vietnam is doing this. Vietnam is trading heavily with China not because the Vietnamese love China. They are using China to make themselves strong in the same way that China used the United States to make itself strong. So you use your adversary to make yourself stronger. Now that's that's the that's the best game of geopolitics you can play.
Okay. I have some questions for you on the on on our live stream that I want to actually just uh just pick up one by one. Uh first is that Abhishek Singh says the onus of resolving the differences between India and China at the moment should be on China. Why blame India?
Uh I I I you know I'm I'm sorry. I I can only help you by being very frank. I've studied geopolitics for 50 years. I don't know of any geopolitical dispute where one side is 100% right and the other side is 100% wrong. It can act of military aggression. There are acts of military aggression that are recorded. I mean that the British were colonialists is a recorded fact that that there are you know I'm just giving you one example. So I'm saying there there are everything is not normative. Some things are empirical. No. So, so as you know the uh uh uh in the case of China and India the border dispute you also know that three times the Chinese leaders uh Joe and Li Deng Xiaoing proposed to India we will never be able to figure this all out this border dispute. Why not just accept the line as it is and settle as it is? And as you know three times India turned China down. That's also a fact and and and frankly I think and I think it was unwise to turn down that offer. It was very unwise because that would have settled the matter and as you know China has settled his border disputes with Russia, with Vietnam uh uh with uh Mongolia, with everybody else. It's settled. uh so it is possible to do a deal and and I think it's important therefore to figure out at at the end of the day if you want to succeed you got to figure out what are my bigger more fundamental interests and this is a marathon race between China and India it's a marathon race we will know the winner 100 years from now and the and the marathon race will be determined by Who has the stronger economic legs? If your e if your economic legs are weak, you will lose the race. If your economic legs are strong, you will win the race. And by the way, if India can achieve half the per capita income of Indians in United States, India will have the world's largest economy by far. Right? So the potent the potential for the Indian economy is number one in the world.
But let me can match the economic potential of uh uh India. But let me let me push you on this on the free trade uh on the free trade point that you make when you earlier said that India can compete with anybody. We have a question on our live stream from Sanjay who says no I don't agree the free trade agreement between any country in China can only benefit China because trade with China is a one-way street.
Okay. By the way, trade can never be one way. I mean, I think the point is that it's not. Excuse me. You know something? If if it's all one way, you know what's going to happen? Nobody will nobody if if others don't benefit from trading with China. Yeah. Then they won't have money to buy goods from China. You know, to buy goods from China. And and by the way, if you look at Saudi Asia again, it's amazing that the Southeast Asian economies which were behind China in so many ways, many of them have surplus uh with with China and and and and by the way, it is possible to negotiate a free trade deal with China where they give where the China will give you unilateral concessions temporarily to enable you to catch up uh in the in the in the competition and and and and China was very generous uh to Southeast Asia uh in in giving what they call an early harvest uh in that.
So I want to give you a sense of how a lot of Indians feel and that's why I'm picking up an emotional question even though you spend a lot of time on this conversation saying the one thing you should never be in geopolitics is emotional but this reflects how many Indians are thinking and feeling today. Nanda Goosh on our stream says China wants to push India into a war and then it will crush India. there is a sense what you call the marathon the marathon competition on between India and China there is there is a sense that there's room for only one winner here right and that and and and that is why the kind of sort of coexistence that you're speaking about even though there are not not the kind of historical conflicts that India has with Pakistan with China and you know I remember Modi used to say before this border conflict that not one shot has been fired at these borders for decades that unfortunately now doesn't apply. we're actually seeing a kind of you know we've seen a military conflict but how do you address this Indian apprehension which is very real which is very widespread that now now the narrative is it's not Pakistan it's China that's the real uh adversary it's China that has blocked for example UN sanctions against terror groups like the Lashkar Taibad the Jamaat Dava you've served as a president of the UN security council you know you know what these concerns are about so just address that concern that China does not even stand India on the issue of terrorism.
Yeah. I mean I I I can see the questions from Nita Gooos that China wants to push India into a war and then it can try to crush India. You know I I um sometimes some truths are very painful. The Chinese are very very concerned about a war but they're very concerned about a war with the United States. very concerned because the United States is clearly trying to push China down. I mean that's obvious for obvious reasons and uh if you go to Beijing and I of course I've been there a few times and you mention India they look very puzzled. Oh really? They're concerned about us. Why China? I was amazed at the indifference of the Chinese to India because for them their number one threat and by the way there'll be a monumental struggle between US and China in the next 20 years. The Chinese have only one obsession. They got to survive this US onslaught against China which is coming which is as I say I've documented in my book has China won and they are focused on that and where and so as a result of that that creates opportunities for others so it creates opportunities for Southeast Asia because in Southeast Asia because uh China doesn't want Southeast Asia to become an anti-Chinese lake the Chinese are are doing their best to build win-win economic partnership with Southeast Asia. And I can guarantee you this that if you can sit down and have a rational dialogue with you've got to push aside your emotions for a while, you'll find that China will be very happy uh to work out a win-win arrangement with India too for the same reason that they want to focus on United States. and and you you're right you're right to point out the major trade deficit between US and and between China and India. You're absolutely right. But there are ways and means of dealing with trade deficits and you know for example when the United States was very worried about the major trade deficit uh with the Japanese as you know the United States and Japan had uh uh negotiations and the Japanese agreed to what is called VERS voluntary export restraints. So you know that that what I'm saying to you is there's no problem in the world is new. Every problem has got a precedent and so you can find ways ways and means of dealing with it and then take advantage of the larger market and there are questions on that and I'll come to that but if the Chinese are indeed indifferent to India, how do you explain this mass military buildup at the border with India? Why the why block sanctions against terror groups like the the Jud and the the Jes Muhammad and the Lashkar which is you know this is a fight that's been happening over the years at the UN.
I I I completely agree with you. It's a huge mistake to block sanctions uh against terrorist groups but as you know I mean I'm sorry to say this uh one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Exhibit A Mandela uh Mandela was called a terrorist by uh uh United States as you know but I on the on the cases you mentioned yes it's unwise of China to block uh uh the designation of terrorist groups I agree with you there.
Okay. Uh Praep Aurora on our live stream seems to sort of have your way of thinking and says how does should India use the differences between China and the United States to our advantage?
It's very simple. Be cunning. Be very cunning. See, geopolitics is not about being nice. It's about being cunning. It's very It's as simple as that. I mean, and and and that's what great geopolitical thinkers are about. Henry Kissinger, George Cannon, they're very cunning. And how are they cunning? That what is the best what is the best position India can be in this dispute? the best you know if you can imagine a seessaw okay on one side the seesaw is China on the other side the seesaw is United States right the seesaw is going like this what's the best position for India to be in in the middle so wherever India puts his foot the seesaw goes that way and guess what both United States and China will be super nice to India that's about being cunning.
What we have just witnessed was an exceptionally candid and tense intellectual exchange It perfectly illustrates the great divide between India's emotional nationalism and Kishor Machbubani's coldblooded realism. Faced with the host's repeated questions on territorial sovereignty and China's expansionism, Professor Makbubani offered a completely different set of solutions. He used the wisdom of Vietnam's ability to both stand up to China and get along with China to contrast with India's rigidity. He used the West's hypocrisy and double standards on human rights to caution India against naively trusting external powers. And ultimately he pointed India towards a cunning path of survival to occupy the central pivotal position on the seessaw of US China competition. His core and repeated advice was this. If you want to succeed in geopolitics, the biggest mistake you can make is to be emotional. This profound dialogue leaves us with several questions to reflect on. First is the pragmatic realism that Makubani describes one that is focused on self-interest and avoids being held hostage by historical sentiment a form of unprincipled cynicism or is it a higher form of survival wisdom in a cruel geopolitical world? Second, to what extent should a nation in dealing with its powerful neighbors prioritize domestic national sentiment and public opinion? And to what extent should it adhere to cold, hard calculations of national interest? And finally, and most critically, is the prescription that Mahbubani offered for India to set aside emotion, embrace openness, and play the cunning balancer between the US and China a viable strategy today, or is it an unrealistic ideal? We are eager to hear your thoughts in the comments below. If you believe this deep dialogue on the India China relationship has provided you with valuable insight, please like, share, and subscribe to our channel. Thank you for watching. Thank you.