India - China: No Message on the Terrorist Attack
STORIES, ANALYSES, EXPERT VIEWS
The the absence of warmth in India-China relations was evident in Xi Jinping not sending a message on the terrorist attack. Only the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson and China's Ambassador to India expressed condolences.
In fact, the Chinese Communist Party's official newspaper People's Daily too did not publish any report at least till April 24. It published that Pakistan had expressed condolences. “This is in stark contrast to the messages pouring in from others, including the US and Russian presidents,” according to Jayadeva Ranade (President, Centre for China Analysis & Strategy).
India - China must ‘act as custodians of stability’
At the political level, as India and China mark 75 years of diplomatic ties, the relationship, once rooted in idealistic visions of Asian solidarity, writes Nirupama Rao (former Foreign Secretary) “has become a tightrope walk across a landscape defined by contested borders, strategic rivalry and deep mistrust. Yet, it is also a relationship layered with opportunities for cooperation, economic interdependence and a shared responsibility for regional stability.”
A structural challenge: At the heart of this complex engagement is the “stark reality that China is today the single most influential external factor shaping India’s foreign policy. From border infrastructure to trade diversification and defence cooperation, nearly every strategic decision India makes is filtered through the ‘China lens’. It is a structural challenge — one that requires us to balance deterrence with dialogue, sovereignty with economic interdependence, and competition with calibrated coexistence.”
Full decoupling is neither feasible nor desirable: There are “fundamental differences. The Line of Actual Control (LAC) remains tense, heavily militarised and vulnerable to miscalculation….Yet, military vigilance is only one piece of the puzzle. India’s trade imbalance with China touched almost $100 billion in 2024-25; yet, Beijing is one of India’s largest trading partners. Despite efforts to ban Chinese apps and restrict certain investments, we remain economically entangled. Our dependence on Chinese components in sectors such as pharmaceuticals and electronics highlights a paradox: we deter at the border but depend on the marketplace. Full decoupling is neither feasible nor desirable in the short term."
Competitive coexistence: This is why, writes Rao, “India’s approach has evolved into what can best be described as ‘competitive coexistence’. We seek to compete with China in defence, infrastructure and regional influence, while maintaining enough engagement given the constraints of economic decoupling….”
Now, with the return of Donald Trump to the White House, “India may well find itself under pressure to align more closely with Washington….Yet, we must tread carefully. Strategic autonomy remains India’s north star — and deeper ties with the U.S. must be balanced with the need to manage any boiling-over of antagonism with China.”
Four pillars: Rao concludes by stating that “India’s China policy must therefore rest on four pillars: military readiness, economic diversification, diplomatic engagement, and narrative control. We must deter without provoking, trade without depending, and ensure skilful negotiation to safeguard interests………Asia can no longer rely solely on U.S. leadership in an era of global disruption. It needs a home-grown security architecture where India and China act as custodians of stability. For that, we must build guardrails — military, diplomatic, and economic — to prevent friction from becoming fire.”
