China and India A Lesson in Conflict Resolution, by Amitai
Etzioni
In
a violent world, the two behemoths offer a welcome respite.
China
and India just reminded the world – especially those who have seen the
slaughter in the killing fields in the Middle East and Africa – that
differences among people can be settled without firing a shot, without anyone getting
killed. The dispute began when China started to pave a road in a Himalayan
region at a plateau in Doklam, a territory China considers part of its land but
India recognizes as part of the kingdom of Bhutan, its close ally. India sent
its troops to stop China, and in turn China sent its troops to reinforce its
claims.
The
conflagration between the two nations, each equipped with nuclear weapons and a
large, recently expanded military, alarmed various observers. Indian-born
economist and British politician Meghnad Desai claimed, according to India Today, “We could be in a full scale war with China
within a month.” A Washington Posteditorial painted a bleak scene of Doklam
as a ticking time bomb: “China and India, two nuclear-armed nations, have come
near the brink of conflict over an unpaved road…Now soldiers from the two
powers are squaring off, separated by only a few hundred feet. The conflict
shows no sign of abating, and it reflects the swelling ambition – and
nationalism – of both countries.” An op-ed in Al-Jazeera similarly set a foreboding scene: “The two
Asian giants, collectively home to a third of humanity, are once again on the
verge of direct military conflict with frightening implications for the region
and beyond.”
Yet
both Indian and Chinese troops left their firearms behind and instead jostled
with each other in ways that are more reminiscent of a pick-up basketball game
or, at worst, a St. Patrick’s Day street brannigan. Videos of these outbursts
have regaled YouTube viewers. One video of
a Doklam skirmish shows roughly a dozen Indian and Chinese soldiers in heavy
coats pushing each other around. Some simply charge with their chests, holding
their hands in the air to signal they don’t want a fight. Others hold their
foes in bear hugs. No punches are thrown. Many of the soldiers wear cameras
slung over their shoulders, as each side seems eager to capture the other
looking abusive. Another video,
which was aired on NDTV, depicts a more heated confrontation at Pangong Lake in
Ladakh, where some patrolmen wrestled, punched, kicked, and hurled stones at
each other. In all, not a shot was fired, not one was killed.
After
two months of shoving and pushing – the two sides settled. Each framed the
withdrawal of their troops from the contested area in their own terms, but
leave they did. An Indian Foreign Ministry official told the Associated Press that the two sides had agreed to return
to the “status quo,” and cable news channel NDTV reported that Chinese
bulldozers had been moved away, and road construction stopped. According to
the Washington Post, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson
said that China will continue to “exercise its sovereign rights” and “guard its
territorial sovereignty.” Talk they did; shoot they did not.
The
issue may well flare up again. And the road, which the region needs, may well
be paved. However, for now this form of conflict resolution deserves much more
attention than it is getting. Jostling – or, my favorite, arm wrestling –
recommends itself for parties that contest territories, from Iraq to Sudan,
from Libya to Afghanistan.
Some
may say that this confrontation in Bhutan was indeed an operatic one, but we
all know how aggressive China usually is. Indeed, China’s foreign policy has
often been described as “aggressive” by academics and pundits. However, in my
2017 book Avoiding War with China, I examined the major
confrontations in which China has been involved in this century. These include
the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands, the Scarborough Shoal, and the Spratly Islands. In
all these instances, no one was killed; not a shot was fired. In some cases
China “lost” (it failed to change the status of the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands); in
some it resolved the differences peacefully (with the Philippines over the
Spratly Islands); and in some the status remains unclear. However, without
exception, aggression – if this term applies at all – was largely verbal or
amounted to some pushing and shoving, ramming fishing boats, and, in one case,
roping off a shoal to impede the travel of some vessels into a Chinese-claimed
area.
I
am not suggesting that China – or India – have adopted Gandhi’s philosophy of
nonviolence or that they are about to disband their militaries and train their
people in advanced jostling. Nor do I argue that they are incapable of engaging
in a major shooting war or other forms of brutality. However, in a period when
we are bombarded with images of civil wars, attacks on crowded urban markets,
and bombings of cities teeming with civilians, the way China and India settled
their latest dispute, at least for now, provides a welcome respite.
Amitai
Etzioni is professor of international relations at The George Washington
University. He is the author of Avoiding War with China, just published by University of
Virginia Press. Follow his work on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.
The Diplomat,
September 01, 2017
No comments:
Post a Comment