Another Round of 'Physical Isolation'? Beware, Military Cadres
Covering Chinese chatters (discourses, narratives, and rhetoric) on external events and actors, military and security issues, and India.
Worldview Weekly #1: China’s Views on India-Canada Spat
By Amit Kumar
The diplomatic spat between India and Canada has escalated quickly in a week’s time ever since Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau accused the Government of India of being involved in the extra-judicial killing of the Sikh separatist leader Nijjar in Canada.
Canada followed up the accusation with the expulsion of an Indian diplomat and RAW officer to which New Delhi responded by sending back the Canadian Deputy High Commissioner in India. India rubbished Trudeau’s claims and demanded that Canada share evidence. India has since also suspended visa facilities and attached to the state properties of several Sikh separatists in India.
The issue also caught headlines in Chinese media, which saw it as an opportunity to highlight the faultlines underlying alliances centered around the US and its double standards with respect to treating India, although not in the manner the Indians have argued.
On the question of the US’s lukewarm or rather lackadaisical response to Canadian accusations of India’s involvement in the killing of a Canadian citizen (recall the Kashoggi incident), Li Haidong, a professor at the Chinese Foreign Affairs University, agreed with the general consensus that “India occupies an absolutely leading position in the overall Asia-Pacific strategy of the US” and that “this move shows the US’s desire to woo India to serve its geopolitical interests in the Asia-Pacific region.”
He continued, “while India is a pawn in the US’s Asia-Pacific strategy, Canada is both an ally and a neighbor of the US. The current approach of the White House is to not get involved in the dispute between these two countries. For the US, the most important thing is to make sure that both Canada and India can be utilized in its global strategy, so neither can be alienated.”
He sounded a caution for Canada, stating that “it should realize that the US aims to exploit Canada rather than assist it.”
Allies are also well aware of this imbalance and understand that they will eventually become expendable to the US when their interests collide, Li noted. As a result, he added, deep-seated rifts persist within the Western alliance system, and its morals and rules are only meaningful when they serve the US’s needs.
A Global Times piece also argued that the US and its allies’ response to Canada’s accusation exposes their commitment to democracy and human rights.
It argued, “Their praise for India's so-called “democracy” is primarily driven by geopolitical interests and the desire to include India in their anti-China alliance. Western elites are well aware of the substantial differences between India's so-called “democracy” and their own. Many individuals in the West do not support India's religious and minority policies.”
Qian Feng, director of the research department at the National Strategy Institute of Tsinghua University, told the Global Times that the West, especially the US, in recent years has been waving the banner of common values of democracy and freedom, attempting to develop comprehensive cooperation with India in order to contain China. Qian argues that they [the US and its allies] are willing to turn a blind eye to what he thinks are India’s human rights abuses and infringement on the rights of domestic ethnic minorities, which exposes the hypocrisy of the Western alliance with India based on their so-called “common values.”
The US finds itself in a difficult position and has been reacting cautiously after Canada’s accusation that India may have been involved in the assassination of a Sikh activist on its soil.
Another GT piece sought to highlight the dilemma facing the US and the unequal nature of the US-centred alliance. It said, “The diplomatic row between Canada and India over the alleged assassination of a Sikh activist has served as a perfect example of the West's double standards,” for it would not call out India as it would if it were any other country not friendly to them. Furthermore, it said, “The collective silence of the West also reflected the deep imbalance of the alliance…where morality and rules hold no value unless it serves the US' strategic interests.”
Thoughts: Strategic circles in India express concern that the spat with Canada and the “hard intel” Trudeau has cited to prove Nijjar’s extrajudicial killing by India will sour India-US relations (given the US has a role in the sharing of some of this intel, and is Canada’s ‘Five Eyes’ ally).
However, contrary to this perception, the Chinese narrative on the issue says that the US hasn’t reacted harshly enough, and India has been let off easily. There are three key takeaways from what Chinese scholars argue:
The US will undermine its allies if their interests at a given time don’t converge, highlighting the vulnerabilities in the US-led alliance system.
US’s commitment to human rights and “shared values” is only good for lip-service. Drum-beating of India’s democracy in the US is merely to appease it to act as a pawn in US’s China containment strategy.
US maintains double-standards, because if a non-friendly country (read: China) would have been accused of extrajudicial killing on the soil of a US-ally, the treatment would be much different and harsher.
Guarding the Great Wall #1: Show me who your friends are, and I’ll tell you who you are!
By Anushka Saxena
‘Purify your Social Circle, Life Circle, and Friend Circle’, a commentary in the PLA Daily warned military cadres.
The commentary, authored by Chen Qinghua of the Reform and Establishment Office of the Central Military Commission in the September 22 edition of the PLA’s mouthpiece, begins by discussing a rather short story from the Chinese novel ‘Journey to the West’, that Xi Jinping once narrated in May 2014, during an inspection of the General Office of the CPC Central Committee. It goes like this:
Sun Wukong placed Tang Sanzang inside a circle and used the Golden Hoop Bar to draw a circle, so that demons and monsters could not enter. You must draw a circle for yourself. (孙悟空把唐僧放在那，用金箍棒划一个圈，妖魔鬼怪就进不来了。自己要给自己划一个圈。)
Back then, Chinese state media referred to this idea as “Xi’s ‘Circle’ theory,” and today, the idea has truly evolved as a pillar of the Chinese state’s anti-corruption corpus.
And what is this idea? It is that all cadres, especially military cadres, live in an environment where interpersonal interactions are unavoidable. But they must keep their social and personal circles clean and tidy. As Chen puts it in his commentary:
Marx believed that the essence of a person lies in their reality, which is the sum of all social relationships. Party members and cadres do not live in a vacuum, and necessary interpersonal interactions are unavoidable. However, these interactions must be principled and regulated.
This is perhaps the best policy implementation of the saying: “Success or failure in life depends on the wisdom of your friends.”
And why is this especially significant for political and military cadres? Chen explains:
Especially for leaders, once their power attracts people with ulterior motives, issues like using power for personal gain and corrupt transactions can easily occur.
In interactions, there is politics, discipline, principles, and image. Because military personnel have a special identity, whether it's internal or external interactions, they should interact with people who bring positive influences to maintain a good military image.
And what does Chen recommend cadres do when they begin attracting untidy company? He says:
Leaders at all levels should always uphold discipline and regulations, work diligently, engage in honest interactions, control their own actions, avoid engaging in activities they shouldn't, and be cautious about their associations. They should firmly reject utilitarian, pragmatic, and materialistic interactions, and be vigilant against relatives and friends' "chit-chat," schoolmates' "catching up," and neighbors' "networking." They should truly be politically astute, knowledgeable about military affairs, clean in economics, and upright in their personal lives.
The foundation of these recommendations is a ‘Code of Conduct for Social Interactions of Military Leading Cadres’ issued by the Political Work Department and the Discipline Inspection Commission of the CMC in June this year. Even though the text of the Code (as per my knowledge) isn’t publicly available, People’s Daily reported that the standards set therein govern military cadres’ interactions in eight spheres:
Interactions between military leading cadres and local party and government organs and their personnel;
Interactions with enterprises (institutions) and their relevant personnel;
Interactions with social organizations;
Interactions with news media, theoretical research and academic exchange institutions and their personnel;
Interactions with ethnic and religious organizations and religious believers;
Interactions with various foreign organizations, institutions, and personnel; and
Interactions with family and friends, as well as virtual interactions on internet social platforms.
But the specific excerpt from Chen’s commentary, that has also caught the attention of the Western media, is this:
For leadership cadres, the more others care about them, the more they need to be cautious; the more others respect them, the more they need to respect themselves. From the investigation and handling of corruption cases in recent years, it is evident that many instances of 'hunting' are camouflaged under the pretext of personal relationships, often using labels like hometown acquaintances, classmates, or comrades-in-arms. It's akin to the metaphor of 'boiling a frog in warm water,' gradually turning one's 'circle of friends' into a 'net of influence,' where these seemingly close-knit circles become elaborate traps. 'Careless friendships' have been a significant factor leading to the downfall of some individual leadership cadres. (”对领导干部来说，别人越关心，自己越需要小心；别人越尊重，自己越需要自重。从近年来查处的腐败案件看，很多“围猎”行为披着人情往来的外衣，打着老乡、同学、战友等旗号，像“温水煮青蛙”，不知不觉使“朋友圈”变成了“包围圈”，让“小圈子”织成了“大圈套”，“交友不慎”是个别领导干部落马的重要原因。)
The Chinese military apparatus is witnessing a shake-up, amidst the dismissals of and the ongoing anti-corruption investigations against military leaders in the Rocket Force since August 2023, and most recently, the disappearance and reported removal of Chinese National Defense Minister and State Councillor Li Shangfu. Speculations surrounding the whereabouts of other CMC leaders such as Zhang Youxia and Liu Zhenli, who were missing from a crucial meeting on ‘Military Study’ and the implementation of Xi’s Socialist Ideology on September 15, are running amok.
In this regard, many Western media platforms are looking at the publication of the commentary as a sign that these disappearances and removals are all linked to the responsible military cadres’ inability to “purify” their social and friend circles. It may be so, but what is also important to note is that this message keeps on coming up time and time again.
Just last year, Study Times reported that at the opening ceremony of a Central Party School Young Cadres Training Programme, Xi Jinping emphasized that “[Young cadres’] Interactions must be guided by principles and rules, and continuous efforts are needed to purify one’s social circle, life circle, and friends circle. For young cadres, safeguarding their interpersonal relationships is not a personal matter; it is a matter of great importance concerning the party's integrity and political environment.”
Further, Xi had also added:
Looking at some fallen “tigers,” a common trait is the breach of their life circles, with "family members implicated" or even the entire family involved in corruption.
The emphasis on purification of the “three circles” has at its core the principle that cadres can never trust their willpower too much. As Chen wrote in his commentary:
The most effective way to stay away from danger and temptation is to practice "physical isolation." Never overestimate your self-control or trust your abilities; avoid participating in activities that you can avoid and decline dinner invitations when possible.
As the Chinese “fight against corruption” rages on, more “tigers” are likely to fall for not having done enough to “purify their circles.”
Worldview Weekly #2: When Xi Meets Prachanda
By Amit Kumar
Nepal’s Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dhumal (Prachanda) is on an official visit to China from 23 September to 30 September. During the visit, aside from Nepal-China relations, India-Nepal relations were also a subject of discussion within the Chinese media.
But first let’s look at what the Chinese Foreign Minister spokesperson, Mao Ning, had to say about the Nepal-China relations and the expectations from Prachanda’s visit during a regular press conference:
Prime Minister Prachanda has visited China many times and made an important contribution to the growth of China-Nepal relations. During the upcoming visit, President Xi Jinping will meet with him.
China and Nepal are traditional friends, neighbors and strategic cooperative partners. In recent years, our two countries conducted frequent high-level exchanges, enhanced communication and cooperation in economic and cultural fields, and maintained close coordination and collaboration on international and regional affairs. China stands ready to work with Nepal to deepen strategic mutual trust, expand practical cooperation, advance the high-quality Belt and Road cooperation and elevate the strategic cooperative partnership to a new height through the visit.
Moving on. This time, the two sides are flaunting the success of the China-Nepal Transit Transport Agreement, recently under the aegis of which, the first batch of imported goods – 15 tons of turmeric powder from Vietnam – arrived in Kathmandu via the Tianjin Port in northern China. However, even here, Global Times just couldn’t keep India out of the picture.
Wang Shida, the deputy director of the South Asia Institute of the Contemporary International Relations Research Academy of China, in a piece for the Chinese media outlet, described the achievement as a step towards reduction of Nepal’s reliance on India.
He wrote: “In contrast to the substantial progress made by China and Nepal in areas such as cross-border transportation, Nepal has been facing ongoing issues with another neighboring country, India, recently.”
Alluding to the territorial dispute between India and Nepal and amplifying the concern by pointing to the newly unveiled mural painting in India’s new parliament, Wang said,
“The incidents of the mural and road inauguration reflect the ongoing contestation and counter-control between Nepal and India, which has been a longstanding feature of their relationship. For a long time, India has adopted a paternalistic approach in its policies toward Nepal.
While providing some support and assistance, India often resorts to rude and unilateral actions toward Nepal.”
Wang continued that India has sought to control Nepal by leveraging the geography that has left Kathmandu “heavily reliant on India for economic and external communication, including the transit of essential goods such as food, medicine, and fuel through India.” This geographical dependence, he argues, has rendered Nepal “deeply influenced, and even controlled, by India in political, social and security domains.”
Explaining the reasoning behind Nepal’s decision to join China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), Wang says:
“In history, India has repeatedly used the agreement on transit through Nepal as a coercive diplomatic tool, threatening and implementing blockades against Nepal to force the Nepali authorities to adopt domestic and foreign policies that align with India's wishes. This has caused serious dissatisfaction among various levels of Nepali society and the government. Nepal has also actively sought alternative transportation routes to reduce its dependence on India. In 2017, Nepal officially joined the Belt and Road Initiative, which was a clear indication to India that Nepal is a country with the right to make independent choices.”
He however acknowledges that an objective assessment of Nepal’s position vis-a-vis India requires Kathmandu to “continue to rely…on the transit routes provided by India…which means that Nepal cannot completely sever ties with India.” He concludes that to “handle relations with India without compromising national sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity while ensuring smooth communication between Nepal and the outside world, has always been the greatest challenge for Nepal's foreign policy.”
Interestingly, Qian Feng, Director of the research department at the National Strategy Institute at Tsinghua University, noted that by joining BRI, “Nepal has become land-linked from a landlocked country” (even though Nepal has been using India’s Kolkata/ Haldia and Vishakhapatnam ports for decades).
China’s rhetoric seems aggravated in the aftermath of the signing of the revised India-Nepal Transit Trade Agreement earlier this year, which grants the latter access to India’s inland waterways, and potential access to two other Indian ports – Mundra and Dhamra – is under deliberation.
Guarding the Great Wall #2: Designing War
By Anushka Saxena
Explaining China’s outlook on designing a war based on technological superiority, another really interesting commentary appeared in the ‘Military Forum’ column in the PLA Daily’s September 21 edition.
The crux of the commentary’s arguments is this:
A top-tier military designs wars, while a second-rate military responds to them. From this perspective, designing wars is a prerogative of world-class armies (read: the PLA).
As the reforms of the PLA have been put in place since 2015, technological innovation and integration in the military domain have become key features.
From the Chinese perspective, there are three stages to the complete technological modernization of a military: mechanization (integrating machines to help humans), informatization (using the internet to connect machines and humans) and intelligentisation (making machines ‘intelligent’ and autonomous to relieve humans). These rather non-linear stages are critical to the making of a “world-class armed force” that can fight and win “short-duration, high-intensity, localized” wars. Clearly, technological advancement is at the center of each of these stages and war goals.
Accordingly, the commentary emphasizes three pillars of successfully designing future wars from a technological perspective – emphasizing foresight, highlighting asymmetry, and aiming for precision.
China has done a thorough job of emphasizing foresight by drawing lessons from any and all types of wars fought across the world. In another commentary published by the Chinese Ministry of National Defense in May 2023, scholars argued that “There are never two identical wars in the world. Innovation in tactics can be inherited and learned from, but cannot be copied.” Hence, China’s efforts are focused on “inheriting” warfighting lessons while focusing on self-innovation to build “distinctive” tactics.
On the aspect of highlighting and studying asymmetry, some scholars and commentators are elaborately pursuing the case study of the Russia-Ukraine war. For example, one of Guancha’s latest columns by military commentator Xi Ya Zhou had some keen insights on how the R-U war exemplifies asymmetric warfare. Some of his key arguments include:
Currently, on the front lines, the biggest losses for both sides come from the opponent's asymmetric warfare capabilities.
In such a confrontation, Ukraine, which receives NATO assistance and holds a slight technological advantage in many aspects over the Russian military, is facing off against the Russian military, which holds a significant advantage in firepower and a slight edge in troop numbers.
Russia's economy, unexpectedly, has regained vitality under the nourishment of war. Perhaps this more pathological economic boom can only be sustained in the short term, but it's better than forever slumbering in endless decline.
However, Russia's enormous war machine has been neglected and lacks technological updates for far too long. Now, the nature of warfare has changed compared to 1989, so even weapons and ammunition produced with outdated technology cannot be supplied indefinitely by Russia's military-industrial complex.
Moreover, over the past thirty years, the technology and equipment related to the digital revolution are beyond their capacity to produce in sufficient quantities.
With its own resources and two traditional strengths, "steamrollers" and "gray livestock," Russia has been engaged in a back-and-forth conflict with Ukraine, which also possesses the same traditions.
As the war continues, Ukraine has leveraged its significant "asymmetric warfare" capabilities obtained through Western assistance to play an important role on the battlefield, and it has even held its ground against Russia.
These are the kind of precise lessons (pun-intended) China is drawing to make its own warfare tactics more precise.
In the coming years, it is likely that the focal endeavour to enable the achievement of precision warfare and technological integration would be mathematical simulations. As the PLA Daily commentary recommends:
Based on big data analysis and computational results, design operational actions and tactics, repeatedly simulate specific content to ensure that war designs adhere to the characteristics and laws of systemic confrontation. Emphasize the advantages of technological iterative design.
In war design, based on specific military and mathematical models, continually adjust and improve the original design results according to changing circumstances. Conduct experimental verification to ensure that war designs can rapidly iterate and upgrade according to changes in the enemy situation, our situation, and the battlefield environment, forming design products adapted to the latest circumstances.
In this backdrop, the PLA is already undertaking extensive combat scenario training exercises to put theoretical frameworks into action and test untested capabilities.
This comprehensive edition of ‘Pekingnology’ from 2020 is worth going back to, to understand the three modernisations of the PLA and the significance of achieving a defense technology “revolution” in this regard:
Latest from the Indo-Pacific Studies team:
The foreign ministers of the Quad, comprising India, the US, Australia, and Japan, met on the sidelines of the 78th UN General Assembly (UNGA) session. In 2024, India is set to host the Quad Leaders’ Summit. In this context and given the Quad’s expanding role, this Issue Brief by Bharat Sharma of the Takshashila Institution outlines Quad’s policies and priorities in the Indo-Pacific and reiterates our area-specific recommendations for the Quad.
Eye on China is a weekly newsletter curated by the Indo-Pacific Studies Programme at The Takshashila Institution, a public policy think-tank based out of Bengaluru, India.
 | A guest post by
|
 | A guest post by
|
If only I could have witnessed the moment Trudeau realised that the USA considers India more important than Canada.