China Playing the Brahmaputra Card Shouldn’t Surprise Us Anymore

China playing the Brahmaputra card and blocking the move to ban JeM chief is predictable, writes C Uday Bhaskar.

The international response to the counter-terrorism (CT) operation conducted by India on 28 September against the launch pads along the LoC (Line of Control) with Pakistan continues to remain largely empathetic – with a predictable exception.

Over the last few days, Pakistan has either been advised, rebuked or chastised for its support to terror groups, though the mandatory references to the need for mutual restraint and dialogue have also been made by most of the capitals.

Also Read: Baramulla Attack: One BSF Jawan Martyred, Combing Ops End

US Pulls Up Pakistan

A comparison of the responses from the USA, Russia and China are instructive of their approach to the challenge of terrorism, state support to such deviant policy, and the embedded nuclear strand.

The US response was unambiguous in characterising Uri as a terror attack and the observation by the State Department noted: “We have consistently expressed our concerns regarding  the dangers that cross-border terrorism poses for the region, and that certainly includes the terrorist attacks in Uri.” Furthermore, the US urged Pakistan to take action to “combat and de-legitimise” terror groups like the LeT (Lashkar-e-Taiba), Haqqani network, and JeM (Jaish-e-Mohammed).

There has been no explicit use of word or phrase by the US to suggest that India’s   limited CT operation amounts to escalation of any sort. However, Pakistan’s repeated attempt to play the nuclear card was rebuked by the Obama administration and an official cautioned that “nuclear capable states have a very clear responsibility  to exercise restraint regarding nuclear weapons and missile capabilities.”

Remember Kargil in 1999 and the Bill Clinton-Nawaz Sharif meeting on 4 July that year?

Also Read: After Uri, How the Attack on Army Camp in Baramulla Unfolded

Hillary Concerned About Nuclear Suicide Bombers

The nuclear profile of Pakistan also came under scrutiny during the ongoing US presidential campaign, and the Democratic candidate Ms Hillary Clinton reflected a long-standing  global concern.  In response to a media query about the South Asian region, Ms Clinton expressed her concern about Rawalpindi’s nuclear weapons falling into jihadi hands through a coup by a group of Islamist officers deeply committed to the ‘cause’, and that this in turn could give rise to nuclear-armed suicide bombers.

Also Read: Will a Full-Fledged Shooting War Cripple the Indian Economy?

Russia Backs India

The response from Moscow is also empathetic to the Indian position, though it is more nuanced.

We are concerned with the aggravation lately of the situation along the line of control between India and Pakistan. We are calling on the parties not to allow any escalation of tension and to settle the existing problems by political and diplomatic means through negotiations.

Statement from the Russian Foreign Ministry

In a nuanced choice of phrase, Moscow also reiterated that “We stand for decisive struggle against terrorism in all its manifestations.”

Russia conveyed its expectations in an appropriate manner with the exhortation that  it expected Pakistan to take ‘effective’ steps in order to stop the activities of terror groups ‘in the territory of the country.’ The subtext pointed to the presence of major terror group leaders such as Hafiz Saeed and Masood Azhar and the support they receive from both the Pakistani state and some sections of civil society.

Also Read: After Surgical Strikes, PM Modi Must Address the Kashmir Conflict

Predictable Response from China

The more predictable response in relation to Pakistan and terrorism came from Beijing. While seeking to maintain its version of neutrality, the official statement noted that China was “concerned about continuous confrontation and tension” between India and Pakistan and called on both the parties “to exercise restraint.”

This was the  first response by Beijing to the surgical strikes carried out by India along the LoC. The spokesperson of the Foreign Ministry added that Beijing “as a shared neighbour and friend to both India and Pakistan” was “concerned about continuous confrontation and tensions between India and Pakistan”.

But the ‘friend’ to both nations chose to exercise its vote in the UNSC in favour of Pakistan with respect to terrorism. India had moved the UN to designate JeM chief Masood Azhar  as a terrorist for some time and the matter is now with the apex body of the UN. Among the five permanent members, four have supported the Indian position, but China had placed the Azhar decision on ‘technical hold’ in March 2016. This decision would have lapsed in September end and it was expected that Azhar would be listed on Monday (3 October) as urged by India.

However, in a pre-emptive move, Beijing on Saturday (1 October)  stated that it was extending its technical hold on the Azhar issue – two days before the expiry of the earlier period. This will now continue till December end.

Also Read: The Surgical Attacks Will Change the Rules of India-Pakistan Game

China Plays the Brahmaputra Card

The symbolism and the diplomatic signal to India and the global community  is self-evident. On matters of strategic import  to South Asia, Beijing has thrown its unequivocal support with the Pakistani military and is by extension, tacitly endorsing state support to terrorism.

To further compound the Indian disappointment over Beijing’s moves on the regional chess-board, China has also announced on 30 September that it has blocked a tributary of the Brahmaputra river as part of a major hydro-electric project whose construction began in 2014.

The Chinese initiative to harness the Brahmaputra for generation of hydro-power is not new, but the timing of the announcement is likely to stoke domestic sentiment in India. The image of China as a responsible power will remain contradictory if it continues this policy of  supporting Rawalpindi on terror – come what may. But it is also the reality that the Modi government will have to factor in as it prepares for the BRICS Summit in Goa in mid October – post-Dusshera.

Can the demon of terror be effectively contained if one major power remains inflexible in its policy orientation?

Also Read: Surgical Strikes: Modi Maintains his Predictable Unpredictability

(The writer is a leading expert on strategic affairs. He is currently Director, Society for Policy Studies. He can be reached at @theUdayB. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)

Also Read: Muted Global Response on Strikes Hints Delhi Did its Homework Well