In a study titled “How China-India relations will shape Asia and the global order”, published by Chatham House, Chietigj Bajpaee and Yu Jie present a compelling and timely analysis of India-China relations. They argue that the stages of rivalry between these two Asian powers continue to evolve as both rise and engage with each other across various platforms suitable for power projection. The authors suggest that India-China relations may emerge as the most consequential geopolitical dynamic shaping the 21st-century international order, holding greater significance than any other bilateral relationship by representing nearly 40% of the global population.
Asserting that border disputes are merely symptoms of a much broader geopolitical rivalry, the authors identify material and perceptual asymmetry as the core of the tension between the two nations. In particular, they highlight perceptual asymmetry—China’s unwillingness to recognize India as a peer and an equal—which leads Beijing to interpret Indian actions primarily through the prism of the China-US relationship. This perception reduces India to a pawn in the larger geopolitical rivalry between China and the United States and, the authors note, serves as a major source of trust deficit in the India-China relationship.
The study explores the complexity of the economic ties between the two countries, revealing that India’s economic dependency on China significantly undermines global efforts to build supply chains that are less reliant on Beijing. Stressing India’s deep reliance on Chinese components in its industrial, pharmaceutical and renewable energy sectors, the authors challenge the narrative that India is a major beneficiary of Western efforts to diversify global supply chains away from China.
Importantly, the study identifies several areas of convergence between India and China that are often overlooked by Western observers. These include shared positions on dealing with non-democratic regimes and global governance-related issues. Both countries maintain a value-neutral foreign policy and prioritize the right to economic development over climate concerns. According to the authors, such positions limit the scope for deep alignment between India and the West, despite shared anti-China sentiments.
The study stands as a strong critique of prevailing Western assumptions about India-China relations. It questions the analysts who see the October 2024 border agreement and the resumption of high-level diplomatic dialogue as a turning point in India-China relations, and, observes that core disputes remain unresolved. It warns that while the border deal is significant, it does not address deeper grievances or potential flashpoints and that issues ranging from river water disputes to the succession of Dalai Lama will continue to trouble the relationship.
Ultimately, the authors contend that viewing the India-China relationship solely through the lens of the border dispute misses the broader strategic picture. The rivalry between these two Asian powers spans economic competitions, regional influence, global governance norms, and competing civilizational narratives. In this sense, the study is a much-needed corrective to reductionist narratives and offers a nuanced understanding of how India-China relations will shape the future of Asia and the global order.
By offering valuable insight into the complexity of the relationship between India and China, the study calls on Western policymakers to engage with India on its own terms, rather than attempting to position it merely as a geopolitical proxy in the Indo-Pacific.
