# SCO Summit: Why India's Playbook Has Barbs For Pakistan But Diplomatic Restraint For China | Geeta's World Ep 43

An episode of [Geeta's World](https://invisiblenetwork.ai/podcast/1635741757), 9 May 2023, 58 min.

Audio: https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/53792098/09_may_23_geetas_workd_ep_43_mix_128.mp3

The recent SCO Council of Foreign Ministers' Meeting in Goa saw intense verbal exchanges between India and Pakistan. But a few observers noted that Jaishankar's recent comments on not engaging with Pakistan to counter terrorism went a bit too far, and analysts say both Jaishankar and Zardari officials put up a “performance for their respective domestic audiences". Is it so? Meanwhile, China has continued its aggressive posture towards India by asserting claims over the territory of Arunachal and releasing a list of Chinese names for places in the region. Yet, Jaishankar’s strong words are restricted to Pakistan. So, can it afford to frown at the Chinese? Listen in!

## Transcript

[0:00] This Is Today podcasts. The recent SEO Council of Foreign Ministers meeting in Goa
[0:08] saw intense verbal exchanges between India and Pakistan, but a few observers noted that
[0:14] doctor Jashnker's comments are not engaging with Pakistan to counter terrorism went a bit too
[0:19] far, and both Jashanka and Zardari put up a performance for their respective domestic
[0:24] audiences. Is it so a certain extent here? Look at the language?
[0:28] It is certainly you know you've taken it up a notch. Meanwhile, China
[0:33] has continued its aggressive posture towards India by as certain claims over the territory of
[0:39] Arunachal and releasing a list of Chinese names for places in the region. Yet
[0:44] Jaschunker's strong words are restricted to Pakistan. So can it afford to frown at
[0:49] the Chinese? Not really, And it is true with China, the ties
[0:54] are real, they're pragmatic. With Pakistan, the ties are fraught with tensions.
[1:02] Hello, I'm anna PREDESSIONI with India to Day TV's Foreign affairs editor Geta
[1:07] Mohan, where with Geta's astute and incisive crasp of world affairs, we delve
[1:11] into all that is urgent and pressing in world politics and comprehend how these developments
[1:18] in other countries could shape India's global ambitions of being a Vishwa guru. Let's
[1:25] untravel Geta's world. Well, this is the forty third episode of Githa's World
[1:32] and Geta Mohan has joined me in the studio. Well, I can say
[1:36] that Geta has been running a really hectic schedule, very hectic. Just came
[1:40] back all tanned from standing. Not because I was enjoying the beaches, standing
[1:46] on the beach and were giving lives for our but I mean, yeah,
[1:51] like, but Goa is always fun, right it is. It's also fun
[1:53] to do any of these multilateral because a lot of our journalists from across trees
[2:00] come. So those are times when you meet your friends from various countries.
[2:04] Is also, you know our beat, we're very vibrant. Actually, yes,
[2:07] I saw your beat pictures. Actually yeah. And by the way,
[2:13] your cat, oh yeah, I mean those pictures are really adorable. I
[2:16] can't really give it a miss. But the thing is that we are discussing
[2:22] Goa. I mean, those who are not initiated and those who are not
[2:25] aware of what's happening around is that Geeta went to goa. I think last
[2:30] week it was the entire week that you went. No, no, just
[2:35] Friday Saturdays, okay, right, the main days were Friday, Thursday,
[2:39] Friday, Saturday okay for us. Yeah, so that was for the SU
[2:44] summit that happened last week. And before we begin with the with the topic
[2:50] at hand, I'll just give you a brief introduction to what exactly is SU
[2:53] and I think we have discussed in one of our very earlier ever briefly touched
[2:59] upon when during the last summit in summergan Yes, we did. So if
[3:05] listeners they want to go and check out the earlier episode, you can do
[3:07] so. But this is actually a bit more fresh with fresh inputs and Githa's
[3:13] of course on ground inputs as well. So this meeting was, you know,
[3:19] a very significant step towards the upcoming SU Leader's summit in July, which
[3:23] is scheduled in July, which is also to be held in New Delhi.
[3:28] And during this meeting, India had a meeting as in like the Foreign Minister's
[3:31] meeting and the Defense Minister's meeting, India had bilateral discussions with the major countries
[3:38] China, Russia, Kazakistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Iran and Belarus.
[3:46] And there were several pertinent points that stood out, actually, notably when
[3:51] Indian Defense Minister Rajnat Sink he shook hands with all his counterparts except the Chinese
[3:57] Defense Minister Lee Shang Fu the sidelines of the Defense Minister's meeting. This was
[4:01] prior to the Foreign Minister's meet. But there was another event that actually,
[4:08] I mean the media was largely fixated on it, which was the s J
[4:13] Schunker, India's External Affairs Minister and Billah Wall Bui's meet, which kind of
[4:19] overshadowed the other important bilateral meetings leading up to the summit. So Geitha and
[4:25] I in this episode will take a closer look at the recent meetings that took
[4:30] place and go and we'll try to understand through her insights and reporting that you
[4:34] know, will aim to actually provide a better understanding of the upcoming summit,
[4:40] which is expected to cover crucial issues such as the economic development, regional security,
[4:46] and cultural exchange. So to begin with, Geta and in the last
[4:51] episode, when we're discussing summer, I remember asking you that while covering all
[4:56] these summits, you know, you meet all these suited up ambassador and all
[5:00] the interactions and statements are very photogenic and courtiers and diplomatic. But then considering
[5:06] the tensions that you know prevail between many of these countries, there must be
[5:12] some gestures, some incidents that give away this hostility and that conflict that is
[5:17] happening on the ground. And this time like goes without saying what stood out
[5:23] when our foreign minister as Jashanka and Park's foreign minister met and Jashanka greeted Zardari
[5:30] with na musty and not a handshake. In fact, the other gesticulation which
[5:34] happened which was done by Defense Defense Minister Nat Singh, when he chose not
[5:39] to shake hands with China's defense minister and instead greeting him in the same way,
[5:43] the traditional way Na musty. I want to understand from Yugda that you
[5:47] know, yeah, namaste is symbolic of you know, India's culture and traditions.
[5:53] But as someone who has been covering world affairs for a really long time,
[5:56] with the longest time, you can perhaps you know, read between the
[6:00] lines and say that is it like, is it more than something that meets
[6:03] the eye. What did you make of this entire gesticulation that happened. So
[6:08] to begin with, there was a handshake that happened. Okay, see,
[6:14] so a lot of people are not watching reading exactly what happened. There is
[6:19] an on camera for optics, and then there was the off camera. So
[6:27] on May fourth, on Thursday night, that is May fourth, the SEO
[6:31] Foreign Ministers meeting kicked off with a dinner, so or the delegation arrived in
[6:38] the afternoons in the morning. Sergei Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister, was
[6:43] the first to arrive around seven am in the morning on Thursday, and it
[6:46] was in the evening. The dinner was closed door with no cameras allowed,
[6:51] no mobile phone photos taken, and the camera that was shooting was only allowed
[6:59] to take so the explaining you to our listeners. So there's an entire table
[7:03] set up for the ministers. In front of the table was an entire stage
[7:09] set up for cultural function. The cameras were only allowed to be recording the
[7:15] cultural event and not turn around even once to record the dinner table conversations or
[7:20] dinner table visuals. So we do not have visuals, but we do have
[7:27] confirmation that at the dinner, as should have been the case as a host
[7:33] does doctor Ja Schunker shook hands with everybody. They exchanged pleasant trees as well
[7:41] Bilahwa Budhazari and doctor Jess Shunker. And there was a conversation across the table
[7:47] that took place at dinner that could have revolved around Seo. But a handshake
[7:54] did happen. It was just not on camera. Now on the next day
[7:59] when everything is on camera and there are reports of an attack in Rajori where
[8:03] five Indians were killed, and at such a point, I don't think it
[8:11] made sense for doctor jessh And could be seen look at the optics to be
[8:16] seen shaking hands with Pakistan and instead of not shaking hands just with Bilawal.
[8:22] Yeah, jess And Could did not shake hands with any of the foreign ministers.
[8:28] He did a namas day with everybody. In fact, the Chinese foreign
[8:33] minister almost extended his hand for a handshake, not remembering that maybe there was
[8:39] a brief that he's going to only do a namast they're not maybe not remembering.
[8:43] So when doctor jess Could did a namastay, he actually held his hand
[8:48] up to a palm and a fist as you do in a kung fu you
[8:52] know when you do that, Yeah, instead of doing a namas day and
[8:56] bowed down, you know, a little almost like you know, um,
[9:01] in martial arts, the way you put a palm and then a fist.
[9:03] He did that. So I don't know what that really meant, because there
[9:07] would be a lot of reading into that and messaging because this is martial arts.
[9:13] But that certainly, that certainly was the reason why I supposed the Indian
[9:20] Externalfest Minister decided not to shake hands but to just welcome everybody with an MST.
[9:26] And what happens on camera and what happens off camera in diplomacy is quite
[9:31] nuanced and that you could see over there. But then again, um,
[9:37] after the initial remarks at the SEO of Foreign Minister's session, it was quite
[9:41] clear that that it is no holes barred visit. It was like partially so
[9:52] on one on the one hand, we had Bilawal, you know, giving
[9:58] interviews, and then we had doctor Jasnker with this press conference. So there
[10:03] are a lot of there are a lot of reports about what happened, what
[10:07] didn't happen, But the inside story is more interesting than I did file.
[10:13] I did report about how there was a handshake. It was confirmed by none
[10:16] other than blav in an interview to us, But much before that I had
[10:22] already confirmed it through our sources and filed a copy. I mean, yeah,
[10:28] like now that I, you know, got to hear this from you,
[10:33] it's so important to read and not just trust, you know, whatever
[10:39] I was circulating on social media without getting a proper and full context. So
[10:43] basically what happened. It's interesting because that happened at night, and we filed
[10:46] our copies. Whoever did file I did. We did say that, you
[10:50] know, shake, But the next day, when he didn't shake hands,
[10:54] the news became, oh, Jesschenker didn't shake hands with Blaval and that was
[10:58] the story. So people forgot that there was a handshake night, you know,
[11:03] just a last evening, and that went unreported, and everybody went to
[11:07] making visuals and memes and all of that and more out of that one you
[11:13] know clip where they didn't shake hands, and Jessenko was not as warm.
[11:18] Bilawal certainly was a little warmer because he was the guest. And then I
[11:24] think I suppose they were all taken by surprise in terms of the reactions,
[11:31] which have been maybe the harshest since we've had India Pakistan problems, because we've
[11:37] had harsh comments in the past as well. But calling a foreign minister visiting
[11:41] foreign mis a spokesperson of terror industry is taking it to another level. And
[11:46] that clear that was a clear message that with Pakistan there can be no normalization
[11:52] till terrorism does not stop. Does that Does that make calling somebody an elected
[12:01] representative spokesperson of terror industry. I leave that to the to our listeners to
[12:05] decide. Very well, it's just that you see what you want to say.
[12:11] That's that's a big reading. But like you said, um, it's
[12:16] up to the listeners to decide. But just to you know a little bit
[12:20] touch upon whatever the dialogue deliveries and whatever transpired between the two. Yeah,
[12:28] the more of that the volage of bobs and you know, as I say
[12:33] this, the between the two neighboring countries as an Indian Pakistan, but in
[12:39] the earlier meeting when the defense ministers also met, Pakistan's Defense minister Huaja Asif,
[12:45] he not only skept visiting India, but he also did not attend the
[12:48] meeting virtually and instead of representative from the Pakistani Prime Minister's office, Malik Ahmad
[12:56] Khan. He attended the meeting virtually, so this was the you know,
[13:01] the earlier part that happened, but you know, as optics. In one
[13:05] of the of his sharpest attacks on Pakistan over terrorism and Jamu and Kashmir,
[13:11] doctor Jeshankar, he remarked calling his you know, visiting Pakistani counterpart, Bilah
[13:16] Will Zardari, a promoter, justifier and a spokesperson of the terror industry.
[13:20] Now this could make stellar and it did make stellar and sensational headlines. But
[13:26] a few observers Kita they noted that Jash and christ remarks on not engaging with
[13:31] Pakistan to counter terrorism went a bit too far. I mean, you could
[13:37] differ with it, but I'm just stating what they said. And in fact,
[13:41] Zardari also himself he said that let's not get caught up in weaponizing terrorism
[13:46] for quote unquote diplomatic points scoring. And he also said that the owners is
[13:52] on India to create a conducive environment for talks. Now, analysts, they
[13:56] say that both officials they put up a performs for their respective domestic audiences.
[14:03] So I want to understand from you that you know, is it a feasible
[14:05] way to deal with something as grave as terrorism because you also mentioned, you
[14:11] know, lifestyle involved in it. And this was the five army personnel who
[14:16] were killed in a tensely forested data and rajority district of Jammo, Kashmir.
[14:22] Then previous prior to that, on April twenty eight Pooch attack that also happened
[14:26] when five soldiers were killed when they were ambushed by militants. So how do
[14:31] you see this? Okay, there's so many questions you've already asked in one
[14:35] In this one bit, let's begin with your first observation that others attended in
[14:45] person. Why did Billaul have to come? Which was the question many of
[14:48] them were posing, including people in Pakistan. Why do you have to go
[14:52] to India? India has done the August fifteen, twenty nineteen Kashmir decision and
[14:58] they have not reversed it. Why do you want to go unlessen Antal there
[15:01] is We said we will not unlessen Antal there's a change in the decision on
[15:05] Kashmir. Now, in the Shanghai Cooperation Organizations, there are three meetings.
[15:11] There are utmost important Council of Foreign ministers, heads of state, heads of
[15:16] government, heads of state. These are the three that are absolutely important.
[15:20] The others are important as a ministerial in terms of line ministries that if the
[15:31] leaders are going to discuss defense cooperation, line ministries should be able to decide
[15:37] what the area of discussion should be. Right, so their virtual participation is
[15:43] okay. And it's not just the defense ministers. You've seen virtual participation in
[15:48] health meetings, defense meetings, Chief Justice meetings, the CGI. Also,
[15:54] all the justices did not attend the meeting in person. It was virtual,
[16:02] So all those meetings happened virtually. Foreign Ministers meeting in Shanghai Cooperation Organization is
[16:07] one which lays the foundation, sets the tone and tenor for the summit level
[16:12] meeting that is going to take this this year in July. There are no
[16:18] joint communicate in the Foreign Ministers meeting, as is the case in G twenty
[16:23] where because of China and Russia, there has been no consensus in India's G
[16:30] twenty presidency. That certainly seems like something that India has not managed to achieve
[16:37] despite the fact that they managed it in BARLIG twenty. But SU is different
[16:41] over here. There is no joint communicate. What happens is there's a list
[16:45] of decisions that all sides agree on for all sides to agree on. Why
[16:52] would Pakistan not want to be in the room. The negotiations are at a
[16:56] different level altogether. They want to be in the room. This is I'm
[16:59] just giving you an overview of why, and then I'll come to the politics
[17:02] of it. So fifteen decisions this year were decided. The decision areas.
[17:07] There's this all these decision areas of which some were finalized, like adding four
[17:15] new dialogue partners was finalized with all of them signing memorando understanding with SCO,
[17:22] which are Kuwait, the Ue, the Maldives and Myanmar. These are the
[17:27] four countries that are going to be new dialogue partners. The other decision was
[17:33] that I'm giving you some of them. Not everything is divulged. So we
[17:37] don't know all the fifteen decisions, but this will be finalized and announced when
[17:41] the Summit level meeting happens in July. The second important one is allowing entry
[17:48] to Belarus and Iran as full SEO members. In they became SEU member with
[17:55] Pakistan along with Pakistan in twenty seventeen that's the second important decision. Another area
[18:00] that is being discussed, which would be a worry for West since they all
[18:06] look at SU as an anti West block, is the fact that there is
[18:11] a major conversation happening on currency exchange and using national currencies for mutual trade.
[18:19] What will happen if you use national currencies for mutual trade is that trade in
[18:26] certain areas which earlier used to be only done in US dollars will not be
[18:32] done in dollars. Who does it help? It helps Russia circumvent the sanctions
[18:37] that have been put against it, saying that okay, you buy gas without
[18:41] dollars, pay in rupees or buy in rupees and in rubles, and that's
[18:48] how you'll exchange. So it helps Russia. So a certain very important proposal.
[18:53] India put forth a very important proposal since since the addition of India and
[19:00] Pakistan in the SEO, India has been nudging the Forum to include English as
[19:07] one of the official languages. Up until now, Russian and English with the
[19:12] Russian and Mandarin are the only two languages. And now we see, according
[19:18] to doctor jash and Karina's press conference, that there are more takers for this
[19:25] proposal, So maybe in some time you will see English being added. That
[19:29] is India's one very important proposal because most of the countries over there are Russian
[19:36] speaking and can understand, and of course Chinese Mandarin because they're Chinese there,
[19:42] but Indian Pakistan don't speak either, which is why the proposal too had English
[19:48] as a language. That is one part. Now the second part where you
[19:52] say what was the need for Bilawal to go there in person? It's not
[19:57] just because it's heads of Because this is what was an important meeting and key
[20:03] critical decisions were being made. It was also an opportunity for Billahwa to come
[20:07] to India and and say the things that will help him back home. If
[20:15] India is driving a political agenda this government in a way, see, there
[20:21] is no way that right now is now the time to talk to Pakistan because
[20:25] Pakistan has hardly done anything when it comes to twenty six to eleven, Punt
[20:30] Pullbama Uri, all of that and more right, but they're both catering to
[20:37] their own audience. Elections over here will make it impossible for this government to
[20:42] engage Pakistan, even if they do something on the tariffront for Pakistan politically he
[20:52] had to come over here and raise Kashmir and talk about how there is going
[20:56] to be no forward movement unless an aunt Kashmir happens, because that's what is
[21:00] the driving agenda there back home them they're fixated on Kashmir, irrespective of the
[21:07] fact that they in an international space they should be talking about their finances,
[21:14] so on and so farth. But when this question was put to Bilawal,
[21:17] he said, well, we are doing that, but why should that stop
[21:21] us from raising other issues? Why should that stop me from raising the issue
[21:25] of minorities and Kashmir and so on and so farth. So he did all
[21:29] of that. Now, what happened the backdrop of it is a lot of
[21:33] people wondered why was doctor jesh and ks so harsh and why did he use
[21:38] such language against Bilawal. So what had happened was that earlier Bilawal was to
[21:45] come, he was going to meet the meet his counterparts, attend the sessions
[21:52] of the SEO and maybe meet the press. He decided to give a few
[22:00] interviews. He gave it to us as well at the India Today group and
[22:03] I'd say it was a fantastic interview by Rajtip. He asked all the questions
[22:07] that need to have been asked, and when when Bilawal spoke about terrorism,
[22:14] so on and so forth. He had the right counters to all of that.
[22:17] So if people watched the interview in completely, they'll realize what the interview
[22:22] really means. Having said that, Bilawal was going to give a few interviews
[22:30] and he held a press conference only for his for the Pakistani journalists, the
[22:37] Indian side got to know before the press conference that in the interview he said
[22:41] this, he said that is spoken of, Kashmir's spoken of. So he
[22:45] gave it a BBC to India Today interviews, printed interview to the Hindu and
[22:49] then the press interaction. So there was a lot of noise. So all
[22:53] of them had watched and the reporters started asking these questions. Politically, it
[23:00] would not have made sense if doctor Jashunka would not have upped the ante and
[23:03] said, will you come and speak on Indian soil? I have to respond
[23:10] not just in equal measure, but certainly a bit more. And he did
[23:15] that. So that is what happened. When it comes to both the press
[23:19] conferences, they got to know that Bilawal has spoken and what he spoke and
[23:25] so hence the response from the Indian side, and which is clearly the thing.
[23:30] It was not a performance for the domestic audience for a certain extent.
[23:34] Yes, absolutely, when you would have done it in a straight manner.
[23:40] Look at the language. It is certainly you know, he's taken it up
[23:42] a notch and to cater certain audience. Having said that, it does not
[23:49] take away from the fact that India Pakistan ties at this point in time are
[23:53] at it snad and it doesn't seem like they're going to get better any time
[24:00] soon. Yeah, I mean certainly, I think yeah. And finally,
[24:03] when you when you asked about whether if you know, this is the way
[24:07] to go about things, well, nothing with Pakistan has been the way it
[24:11] should be in terms of two countries to neighbors and how they go about things.
[24:18] You see, Blahwi made a very important point and he said unless and
[24:22] until the decision on Kashmir is overturned, there can be no forward movement.
[24:27] But you know, we do know that Pakistan is playing the Kashmir card.
[24:32] Why do I say that is because when did Article three seventy, when was
[24:38] it in stated and when did the thirty five A clause come about. It
[24:45] was much after independence. It was much after you know, governments were formed
[24:51] on both sides. So if Indian government it was not it was not a
[24:57] thing of the past. It was something that the government of India did.
[25:03] So when Government of India was giving special status to Kashmir, Pakistan had no
[25:08] say in it because it was the government. And when the government of India
[25:12] wants to revoke it, why should Pakistan have a stay? Say? This
[25:17] would be a case where Pakistan says we are stakeholders when it comes to the
[25:22] border. When it comes to disputes between India and Pakistan. Yeah, Article
[25:26] three seventeen thirty five A have been very intrinsic and internal to India. Indian
[25:33] government formed it, Indian government brought the law and Indian government is revoking it.
[25:38] When Pakistan had no say, then why should Pakistan have a say?
[25:41] Now? Yeah, I get it, but I mean on other accounts,
[25:47] when it comes to Kashmir, and they keep talking about the security resolutions asked
[25:51] them to move back from Pakistan occupied Kashmir because that's what you and s resolution
[25:56] says you have to move your forces out of you. But I think like
[26:00] it comes to that. You know, same old rhetoric that whatever happens,
[26:03] like whatever is transpiring in our internally, whatever is happening you being a foreign
[26:08] country, you don't have any right. I don't say that. I don't
[26:12] say why. I don't say that. Ana is that when we have a
[26:17] right, and when India continues to speak about minority persecution in Pakistan, if
[26:22] a Sea girl gets kidnapped or a Hindu girl is forcefully married wrongly, so
[26:27] it's terrible, but we do say we do raise issues and concerns with regards
[26:33] to Hindu's and minorities in Pakistan. Similarly, when they see all reports of
[26:40] minority persecution in India and they raise it, then we cannot turn around and
[26:45] say it's an internal matter, because if it's an internal matter or India,
[26:48] then Hindu's, Pakistani Hindus and Pakistani seeks should also be an internal matter for
[26:53] Pakistan. I understand that. So this internal matter argument is as long lost.
[27:00] Yeah, you don't go back, We don't go by that. Yeah,
[27:02] I'm just giving your technical truth to the Kashmir question. I say that
[27:07] Pakistan has been so obsessed, the establishment has moved becoming so obsessed with Kashmir,
[27:15] that the political dispensation does not have room to maneuver. Imagine if Blaval
[27:21] would have come here and not spoken Kashmir and would have said that, Okay,
[27:25] if you want to speak Kashmir, let's talk about the dispute. Let's
[27:29] resolve the dispute bilaterally or whatever you know, third party intervention, whatever um.
[27:33] Talk about terrorism. Yes, okay, this is what has happened.
[27:37] This is what we're willing to do. What are you going to do on
[27:40] this front? I can and then in the in the same breath, if
[27:44] both sides would have raised the issue of minority persecution in both the countries,
[27:48] that that was a sensible conversation. I think to a certain extent, Pakistan
[27:55] has gone beyond the advance pitch of using Kashmir as a card. But isn't
[28:03] it true for our dispensation as well? I mean absolutely, But which card
[28:07] are we talking about? Terrorism is a concern and Kashmir as as we might
[28:15] you know, gain for us the electoral card that we as a dispensation that
[28:22] is being observed in the past few years. Don't you think that is also
[28:26] might be the case, That certainly might be the case from our side,
[28:30] but you will not see us in a multilateral forum like in if you're in
[28:37] the United Nations, so on and so forth. Obsess over Pakistan, Pakistan
[28:41] obsesses over Kashmir anywhere they go. What happens then is that the larger issue
[28:48] of Pakistan's own problems are lost. They are in an absolute financial mess.
[28:55] They should be looking at how to recover from that. And Bila can say
[29:00] all he wants that. You know, okay, we raise these issues,
[29:02] but what stops me from raising other issues as well? You're diluting your agenda
[29:08] over here. But the dilution again, you know when you come to India
[29:11] and I'm saying, dilution is not dilution back home. Back home, he
[29:15] has been certain quarters have really criticized him, but mostly he has been praised
[29:21] for taking on the administration and going and saying what he had to so on
[29:25] and so forth. So he is preparing himself for a larger role in the
[29:30] country in the coalition as well. We don't know whether shabbashri If is going
[29:34] to last because there is contempt of court with them not having gone into elections
[29:42] in Punjab. May fourteenth was the last day. So let's see whether they're
[29:48] going to be held in contempt or not. And if they are not going
[29:52] to maybe Shabbas will survive. If they don't hold elections, then we'll see
[29:56] what is at stake for Shabaz. And in the longer run, then if
[30:02] it's not going to be a PML and prime minister and a PPP Prime Minister
[30:06] of the coalition, who's it going to be? Yeah? Yeah, I
[30:08] mean rightly said that the personal underlying motives, I think they are really palpable
[30:15] and should be taken into account when we discuss something as this. Now moving
[30:19] to China, because that also stood out in the Defense Minister's meeting, and
[30:26] the tension was almost very evident, both nonverbal and verbal when they met and
[30:33] during the ballad from meeting. Also, rather not saying, he told Leshank
[30:37] for in those uncertain terms that violation of existing agreements dealing with their disputed border
[30:44] has eroded the entire basis of bilateral relations. Now, I want to understand
[30:49] from your Ghita that what does this amount too? That you know, if
[30:53] between two SEO meetings China can still do as it pleases and continue on its
[31:00] expansionist mission, does the SEO afford space for other member countries to back India's
[31:08] concerns on this matter, to kind of, you know, put some some
[31:14] sort of pressure, as in like, how does SCO as a collective expect
[31:18] to talk about regional security when internally there is a lack of understanding. I
[31:23] like your questions to Dana, because I think these are questions that people you
[31:27] know, actually have and would have in their head, but will not ask.
[31:33] So in your question, there's another aspect, which is what what is
[31:37] the SU Charter? The SU Charter does not allow bilateral issues to be raised
[31:44] within the forum at all. Okay, So in twenty seventeen when India,
[31:48] when Russia pitched for an Indian membership, China said, if India is going
[31:56] to enter, so will Pakistan. So for a couple of years it was
[32:00] stuck because you know, they were not agreeing on Pakistan. And then China
[32:04] was hell bent, so they said, okay, either both come in or
[32:07] neither comes in. And twenty seventeen we both became members and both countries were
[32:14] told very clearly that SCO is not a place to discuss bilateral issues. Do
[32:21] not make SEO a victim or hold it hostage to your bickering, okay,
[32:27] And it was almost like a warning and a threat that should you do that,
[32:32] you will have to face the consequences. This is not a SARK where
[32:37] India's the big brother, and you know, other countries fallen line and boycott
[32:42] Pakistan and we've not had a summit SARK summit since Pakistan was to hold it
[32:49] and it's been a very very long time. SU is very clear that you
[32:52] keep your own dealings outside the su room. So in this forum, it's
[32:59] not just India Pakistan. Niggling issues in India. China niggling issues also were
[33:04] not raised. It can only be raised bilaterally, which means what which means
[33:08] that China dominated, No Russia. China were the founding members, but they
[33:15] were very clear a lot of it had to do with solving the boundary issues
[33:21] and areas, so on and so forth. So they did not want it
[33:23] to become a place to bicker because a lot of countries these now eight earlier
[33:30] there were six countries were involved and CIS countries. A lot of solving the
[33:36] boarder issues were was also part of that entire conversation and structure. So they
[33:42] didn't want the bickering to really bring the forum down. And so India China
[33:50] issues were also not discussed. Russia also in a larger context of maybe conflict,
[33:55] so food, energy security came up, everything else about Ukraine came up
[34:01] during the bilateral conversation. So what happened on the sidelines of the SCO meet,
[34:07] These bilateral meetings took place. Even the Rajanath meeting that you're talking about
[34:12] is the bilateral meeting on the sidelines of the Sea Defense Ministers meet. So
[34:16] on the sidelines, Chin Gang and Jeshanker met and in that meeting it was
[34:21] made very clear that from the Indian side that unless and until there is complete
[34:27] disengagement at the border, there can be no forward movement. And the Chinese
[34:34] statement was quite interesting because they put it all on India as though India hopes
[34:38] and you know, hopes for this and this, such and such, and
[34:44] we hope that India will bring about stability, almost saying as though the stabilities,
[34:49] the instability is not because our tensions are not because of them, but
[34:52] because of India. So see, you see a dissonance already in how they
[34:58] perceive things, which means that it is going to take a long time for
[35:01] any solution. But yes, all of that happened on the sidelines of the
[35:06] SEC four. Yeah. So there were two very important three, in fact
[35:09] very important bilateral meetings that took place for India. The first day he had
[35:15] a bilateral meeting with the Secretary General of the SEO, who this year is
[35:21] from China and Secretary General Ming. And then there were two important bilaterals the
[35:30] next day, one with Russia and one with China. Okay, but there's
[35:35] another aspect. Geta that I remember the last summit that we were discussing the
[35:39] summerkan one. But since the time of the last summit, China has taked
[35:45] claim on Arunachal and released a list of Chinese names of places in Arunachal.
[35:51] He bet they've done it. This is the third time even before of course,
[35:54] of course, but just in the given timeline. And yet doctor Jashankar's
[36:01] strong words they are restricted to Pakistan and on China, you know, we
[36:07] keep hearing the same platitudes that territorial sovereignty will not be compromised, whereas on
[36:13] ground China is unilaterally you know, changing the status cool India would not be
[36:19] seen to be anything but rude with the pakistanis but can it afford to frown
[36:24] at the Chinese um Not really, And it is true, there is a
[36:30] realization. See there are no there's no comparison between China and Pakistan when it
[36:34] comes to ties with India. With China, the ties are real, they're
[36:38] pragmatic, they are indispensable. With Pakistan, the ties are fraught with tensions.
[36:47] They are not realistic in their outlook and what they're demanding of each other.
[36:54] And of course India does not want terrorism, but there's a lot beyond
[37:00] that. Also, even on the disputes I was talking about the disputes,
[37:02] not about terrorism. Of course that is a demand that's valid, but on
[37:07] disputes they're not willing to see eye Toy went on various counts, and Pakistan
[37:15] for India is quite dispensable. There's a huge difference. They are not part
[37:20] of the which is all Pakistan's fault, because if they would have worked on
[37:25] real manufacturing, the manufacturing terror, they would have been an indispensable force in
[37:31] the region given their important geostrategic position. If they would have looked at furthering
[37:37] their own economic interests by creating industries, they would have done well for their
[37:44] own people, the education system, nothing. They're lacking in so many counts
[37:49] that they've become absolutely dispensable for India. China is not that China's big,
[37:54] China's powerful. In the words of our own external as Minister, he admitted
[38:00] to the fact that if you have to be real, there are no alternative
[38:05] supply chains to China. So you need China. India needs China. India
[38:09] does not need Pakistan. India needs Pakistan to ent error. The other comparison
[38:15] that one makes between India China ties and India Pakistan ties, I think our
[38:22] bit unfair is because with China you have territorial problems, which you could you
[38:30] have with Pakistan also that would be a common stream you had those you had
[38:35] territorial problems or dispute in the boundary question with Bangladesh as well, resolved it
[38:44] because there was a friendly government. But China is not using terrorism as an
[38:50] instrument of state policy. It's very clear. It will arm twist you,
[38:55] it will terrorize you economically, but it will not used terrorists. They have
[39:02] in the past in the Northeast during the insurgency, I have to say funded
[39:07] and armed some of the insurgents who worked against Indian interests and had space to
[39:15] go and stay in Myanmar because Myanmar is a pro China, completely pro China
[39:21] country. But that's not the case right now, and even if it was
[39:28] arming, it wasn't direct state the way it is in Pakistan. Pakistan,
[39:35] on the other hand, has used terrorists and terrorism as an instrument of state
[39:39] policy. So if you compare the two, you're talking about a country such
[39:44] as China that has fully focused on its economic growth and has become a superpower
[39:50] in many ways than one, to a country such as Pakistan which never cared
[39:54] the general so they never cared for their own people. They made money,
[40:00] they're corrupt, the people are in dire straits, and they're still funneling terrorists.
[40:05] So there is a real problem in Pakistan. And this is not from
[40:07] somebody who does not want friendly ties. I'm actually not a hawk, which
[40:13] is what I'm criticized for in my own newsroom, not being a hawk of
[40:17] sorts, but does not mean I will turn a blind eye to what Pakistan
[40:22] has done as policy. And those policies do not just threaten or have not
[40:28] just threatened their own country, but the entire region. Now Pakistan turns around
[40:31] and tells us Annah that, oh, well, we're the biggest victims of
[40:36] terror. India didn't create that those terror organizations, you guys did. And
[40:43] then Bilahwa very interestingly said that most of the terror organizations back then, or
[40:47] the major terrorists were created by America. That does not mean that, you
[40:52] know, you continue, you know, furthering that very same policy, because
[40:59] that policy is disrupting the region, terrorizing their region, and is only cause
[41:06] for chaos. Yeah, makes a lot of sense now I put it this
[41:12] way. Yes, a lot of people to China. Oh you're not talking
[41:15] to Pakistan, but you're talking to China sitting on our land. Yes,
[41:20] it is sitting on our land because they think it's there. They've been claiming
[41:22] it for years. So you resolve the boundary question. But not not a
[41:29] single person not wearing a uniform is sitting on that territory. If there were
[41:32] people not with uniforms sitting on that territory, then you would have to think,
[41:37] oh, China is also using unconventional warfare, is using you know,
[41:42] terrorists. That's not the case. Yes, they're not sending goojars and who
[41:47] what do you say? You know, people who take their cattle to the
[41:52] fields and then cross over and then have guns under their That's not happening.
[41:58] What I'm trying to say that there are there are men in uniform, they're
[42:02] following orders, which means that two governments still have the space to talk.
[42:08] Here. It here doesn't exist because the moment in Cargill War, what didn't
[42:16] my sheriff say, oh, they're not They're just they're not our people,
[42:20] they're not armed people. They did not take the bodies of their own soldiers
[42:23] because they were not wearing uniform. Yes, so, as much as we'd
[42:30] like to say, oh, but why are you talking to China and why
[42:32] you're not talking to Pakistan is because you cannot how do you handle people a
[42:38] country that does not own its own people after sending it across If not for
[42:43] one Nisidurani who accepted and admitted that a Kasab was a Pakistani, there would
[42:49] have been no confirmation and we would have kept fighting about Ajimal Kassa being a
[42:52] Pakistani terrorist, the one life terrorist Scott during twenty six eleven attacks. And
[43:00] I said the Rani lost his job for that. Yeah, exactly. After
[43:02] math of fit a lot to discuss actually in Pakistan and China undercurrents and years.
[43:10] You know, even in these multi laterals, true, I mean,
[43:15] the history and the relations that two countries share is worth reading and understanding in
[43:21] detail before you jumping into conclusions and really believing whatever we see surfacing. But
[43:28] if you go back to Su, the stage is set now for the July
[43:35] summit. Yes, the question is whether if the Pakistani premier, if he
[43:38] remains a premier, if he remains prime minister till then will he come or
[43:43] not. The question also is that the meetings with the Chinese side also were
[43:46] not rather fruitful, and if they were not fruitful, then would there be
[43:52] a visit of the Chinese president. I'd say that for China Su is very
[43:58] important, as for Russia. So the two certainly seemed like would be turning
[44:05] up for the Su exactly. And why would Pakistan miss the opportunity to be
[44:09] the spoiler that it was during this visit as well and go home feeling victorious
[44:15] Because Bilawa felt quite quite victorious and has said he had a rather successful visit
[44:22] in India and then actually mend and held another press conference in Pakistan talking about
[44:29] how the language used by doctor jesh and Ker and he was the host,
[44:35] so on and so forth. All of that happened. Yes, Then jess
[44:37] And corresponded saying that if the guests were nice, the host would have been
[44:42] nice. So some such. So the war of words is going on and
[44:46] us never ending, but with India Pakistan expected to be never ending. Yes,
[44:52] Yes, like our elections in India picture, we have elections and we
[44:55] have war of words. At Pakistan, they're simultaneous. So now now you
[45:00] have Karnataka, then you have a few other states coming up, and then
[45:02] you have the big general election. Actually we'll be discussing a lot of Pakistan,
[45:07] I suppose true. And lastly, to sum this up, you mentioned
[45:14] that this is going to be very fruitful for China. But in the larger
[45:19] perspective, I want to understand if SEU as a whole, as a as
[45:22] a summit in itself, I don't know if it would be a bit exaggerated,
[45:27] but it's do you think it's becoming sort of toxic workplace when it pertains
[45:34] to India? When Why do I say this is because most of the SEU
[45:37] members, you know, they are subscribing to China's version of the world,
[45:42] which is the Belt and Road initiative which will connect Asia to Europe through the
[45:47] erstwhile Silk Root. Now this will pass through Pakistan occupied Kashmir. So obviously
[45:52] India isn't a part of this, but everyone else is and they talked about,
[45:58] i mean, the members, they talked about this enthusiastically at the last
[46:00] year summit as well. Now, India, on the other hand, has
[46:04] been being denied access to Central Asia by Pakistan. But obviously, you know,
[46:10] given the dominant position of China in the SEO, this is also not
[46:15] a problem that will get resolved. So again, to reiterate, do you
[46:20] think that there are too many dead ends at the SEO for India when it
[46:24] comes to resolving some of our most crucial geopolitical hurdles, because you know,
[46:32] in addition to this, the question also emerges is that as India looks to
[46:38] expand its foreign policy, how can it benefit from participating in these summit And
[46:46] to just add to this, an article by the Diplomat it suggested that the
[46:52] SEO, by contrast, is perceived as being China dominated and inherently anti Western,
[46:58] which you said, now formed in two thousand and one as a counter
[47:02] to the West, with you know, the the seo's anti Western stance is
[47:07] likely to be reinforced, you know, with Iran joining in and Belarus to
[47:12] likely follow. Now, this makes India an outlier since the collective standpoint on
[47:19] the SEO will remain anti West. So all in all, I mean,
[47:22] with all these points in consideration, how do you think India will navigate it?
[47:27] And do you think there are too many dead ends for India for being
[47:30] India SEO and is it fruitful? You began by asking whether if it's a
[47:35] toxic work space force for India. I don't think it's a toxic workspace because
[47:44] India has very good ties with the CIA states, the Centraligion states that are
[47:47] there. India has tremendously good ties with the dialogue partners, including the New
[47:52] Phon New Dialogue partners kuwait Ua, the Maldives and Myanmar. India has very
[48:00] ties with the countries that are going to become full member states, which is
[48:05] particularly Iran and Belarus. So I don't see it as a toxic work space.
[48:10] Now what is happening is India is in the middle of a pro West
[48:16] and a pro East block. So these blocks and Indias in between, and
[48:22] Indians in both Indias in the pro West blocks such as the G twenty and
[48:28] invited guest at the G seven which was first while G eight till twenty fourteen,
[48:35] CRIMEA and sident happened and Russia was thrown out of G eight and it
[48:38] became G seven and it is part of SCO. But because everybody's aligned to
[48:47] all the other member states and they are mostly aligned to China, they are
[48:52] an anti West forum and in that they are not looking at whose sovereign ten
[48:59] ted laural integrity is being violated. They're looking at a big bri belt and
[49:06] road initiative by China where if they're part of it, they will be part
[49:09] of a connectivity project that will bring in economic prosperity in their own countries.
[49:15] It is only in one country that is passing through Pakistan, and Pakistan made
[49:22] sure that it passes through a region which is part of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir GEMO
[49:29] and Kashmir POJK. And is there a reason why India is not part of
[49:34] it? So just because one country is creating problems for the entire thing,
[49:42] India will not be a part of it. That others are not going to
[49:45] be off that entire grid for India. India has been telling China that if
[49:51] you move it out of POJK, we'll also be We're okay being part of
[49:54] it, but you cannot have it. I mean, of course they will
[49:59] not be, but I'm just saying that, you know, that's certainly,
[50:01] that's certainly one of the reasons, clear reasons why and is certainly cannot be
[50:09] one of the reasons why India should not be a part of the SEU or
[50:13] cannot work with the SU. Because when they tell these countries that you need
[50:17] to respect other countries sovereignty and territory integrity, they understand that, they realize
[50:23] that, but they say, but you know, that's not our project.
[50:28] We are not part of this entire stretch. We are talking about connectivity from
[50:31] China to this country to that country, so on and so forth. And
[50:36] for us that connectivity matters, and the Chinese have the money and the investments,
[50:40] why should we not And India cannot say anything. So India is also
[50:45] staying away from this entire thing or trying to take on every country and saying
[50:49] not to be a part of it unless and until it is an important country
[50:54] in the neighborhood. But all the countries in the neighborhood who India has great
[51:00] ties it, including the Maldives. They're all part of the seedpeck. Nobody
[51:05] stopped. Nobody can stop any country from working for their own national interest.
[51:10] Like the West could not stop India from taking oil and gas from Russia's irrespectable
[51:19] the entire war. We cannot stop other countries. That does not make it
[51:22] a toxic space because the meetings that are held and the conversations that are held,
[51:29] there's a lot of positive outcome from these conversations. So I only see
[51:35] it grow and move further towards the space, which is a block that counters
[51:43] the West, as does the West counter countering this anti West forum where the
[51:51] idea is to curtail and contain China and now Russia as well. Yeah,
[51:58] and I mean, I just you know, it's not a question but an
[52:02] observation. I was just reading through articles and I think it was published in
[52:07] the print, you know, with said that India's dependence on organizations like SEO,
[52:14] Bricks and Rick Russia, India, China and which were founded or are
[52:20] dominated by China. It raises an interesting question asn't like if sark you know
[52:24] where India as a dominant player, expanded to include major regions, major nations
[52:30] in the region such as Afghanistan, Thailand, Central Asian republics Iran and Russia.
[52:36] Would China join such a group and if it did, would India still
[52:40] be able to retain its dominance indianization? Right, Yes, that's why China
[52:46] comes into the picture. The whole game changes, The whole game changes.
[52:51] Yeah. In fact, if these sark nations South Asian nations are getting tired
[52:57] of not having their own forum and China's part of Asia and they try to
[53:01] get to start another South Asian Forum, that will be a huge disadvantage to
[53:07] India. India lost out on the r SEP. That's the Regional Comprehensive Economic
[53:12] Partnership Agreement with Asian Countries, and India was supposed to be a part of
[53:17] it. China took the lead and while India continued having problems on certain matters
[53:23] before they could sign the r SEP, China already became the lead and the
[53:28] r SEP has been signed without India. So you don't want to lose out
[53:31] or a lot, and you want to be a player. The question over
[53:36] here is not about whether if India should be engaging Pakistan or not, so
[53:42] on and so forth. Just the fact that if for an SCO multilateral Pakistan
[53:49] can travel to India and in two years Pakistan will hold the presidency of the
[53:55] SCO, then India will have to travel to Pakistan. Then both stops them
[54:00] from also working on SARK. There are problems, but ZARK is a forum
[54:06] where your immediate neighbors can get so much help. Look at Sri Lanka,
[54:10] look at you know, look at Nepal, Bangladesh. Countries that are going
[54:17] through economic SARK could have become a real player, and India is certainly a
[54:24] real real player in the region. But for Pakistan and indoor park problems,
[54:31] it's been held hostage and I don't see it being revived anytime, so at
[54:37] least not till our twenty twenty four general elections. Yeah, good note to
[54:44] end this discussion, and I'm sure we'll be revisiting this. So when the
[54:47] SEO summit happens in July, and you'll be there. I think it's happening
[54:52] in you tell only so you don't have to travel, missing out on opportunity
[54:57] to travel. But thank you guitar for joining. Thank you Hannah and to
[55:01] our listeners, I hope you enjoyed the session. I had more more controversial
[55:08] than our earlier subjects. That's true, That's true. I think Indian and
[55:13] Pakistan, India, Pakistan and China trial and entire sue was just discussing and
[55:21] when when Indian Pakistan are in the room, expect them to spoil it for
[55:24] everyone. Everyone. There are those kids in the party who will take the
[55:30] limelight and create a mess, also with nobody else being able to enjoy the
[55:36] party or just these two brats. That's not even the birthday put birthday child,
[55:42] not even the birthday. Yeah, the birthday kid is also sitting in
[55:46] a corner and seeing these two ruin it and take the balloons, taking down
[55:53] the streamers, throwing a cake at everyone. Yeah, what an analogy I've
[56:01] given just actually I could imagine and nobody read my SCO piece where I've written
[56:14] about the sea Charter. There's that. Everybody's only reading that, and nobody
[56:17] read the piece where I brought that handshake happened. Everybody read the piece where
[56:22] handshake did not happen. That's Warsey. I also came in this room with
[56:27] the very first question that they didn't handshake. See, we are living in
[56:30] a very you know, insta driven world. Keep so long piece and universities
[56:37] so like these are like real forget about just graduating it. But on that
[56:44] note, I think listeners please go, and I think I also gave it
[56:47] a read, but I didn't go through entirely. But all her pieces are
[56:52] published our website in that Today, so go and have a read and also
[56:57] listen to this episode now you're rented to read you you know our episodes,
[57:01] so now yeah, and the interviews with Inda today, I think it was
[57:07] very important. So thank you and sharing your feedback as to how you felt
[57:12] about this episode. The number is eight five double eight to nine double six
[57:15] double nine six and the email ideas pots at the rate in the Today dot
[57:20] com. I'll see you next week gither than episode. Thank you so much,
[57:24] Thank you,

Shows are listed from Apple Podcasts' charts and directory, and Podcast Index where it is used. Every show and episode belongs to its publisher and plays from the publisher's own feed; this site hosts none of them.