Why India must view its neighbours through its own strategic lens

Why India Must Rethink Its Neighboring Relations

Why India must view its neighbours - One year has passed since India reopened its visa system for Chinese travelers. While many Indians may overlook this milestone, it symbolizes a broader, cautious shift in relations. Yet, this moment invites reflection on why India should not only maintain ties with China but also expand them.

Historical Disconnects

Indian diplomacy often emphasizes its ancient ties with China. However, scholars such as Krishna Prakash Gupta and Rudolph Wagner note that for most of their shared history, the two nations engaged in quiet exchanges. Monks, traders, texts, and goods traversed vast distances, but there was little in-depth mutual comprehension. The Chinese, in particular, sought to restrict external influence, limiting the spread of foreign ideas.

"Things from abroad" were seen as potential threats, and China aimed to confine their reach.

The British Role in Shaping Perspectives

Geographical separation and strategic choices created a gap between China and India. When modern contact began, the Chinese had to re-evaluate India from scratch. However, India's colonial past meant it was already under British control. As Wagner observed, this relationship was "facilitated" by the British, who served as intermediaries. Qing officials like Wei Yuan relied on British texts, such as Hugh Murray’s Encyclopedia of Geography (1834), to form their understanding of India. These sources painted a picture of a people easily subdued by foreign rule, citing their caste system and philosophical detachment as reasons for their subjugation.

Contrasting Perceptions and Unseen Realities

Wei Yuan’s Illustrated Treatise on the Maritime Kingdoms (1842) became a cornerstone for Qing officials visiting British India. They arrived expecting a “negative model” of resistance and found one. Wu Guangpei, a Qing litterateur, recorded in his Diary of My Southward Journey that Indians seemed to accept their British rulers with calm resignation, as if their subjugation was inevitable. This was ironic, given that the Indian National Congress was beginning to emerge as a force for self-rule during the same period.

Kang Youwei, a prominent Chinese scholar, echoed similar sentiments. His writings, influenced by Robert MacKenzie’s The 19th Century, anticipated a “subdued” populace. In his 1902 letter Discussing India, he argued that Indians would take centuries to reclaim independence, writing, “I am confident that the Indians have no way to restore their country in more than 1,000 years.” This remark coincided with the rise of political movements in British India, yet it remained unchallenged.

Breaking the Mediatory Chain

Not all Chinese visitors relied solely on British intermediaries. Lu Ying, a Qing official sent to study India’s tea industry in 1905, gained insights through direct engagement with local elites. As Zhang Ke notes, a fellow Chinese resident in Calcutta connected him with Bengali leaders, revealing the growing Indian opposition to British rule and their pride in heritage. Lu’s Journal of the Journey to India and Ceylon concluded with a bold question: “How could a people civilised for thousands of years, numbering three hundred million, be forever relegated to the realm of slavery?” He confidently predicted India’s future independence.

A Lesson for Today

This century-old contrast underscores the value of direct engagement. Without firsthand exposure to India’s intellectual and cultural currents, Chinese views will depend on Western sources. Consider the recent New York Times article titled “India’s Hindu Right Has a New Hero,” which exemplifies how external narratives can shape perceptions. India’s neighbors, both past and present, deserve a lens that reflects its own strategic priorities, not just the biases of foreign intermediaries.