8/14/2019 India muzzles media in response to Chinese incursions

1/3

Himalayan Blunder II: Delhi muzzles media at Chinese behest

Brahma Chellaney

At a time when border tensions with China have risen, the Indian government has tried to

pull the veil over the Himalayan-frontier situation by targeting the media for allegedlyoverplaying Chinese cross-border incursions.

Note: No one in the government has denied that such incursions are occurring. Yet themedia is being accused of hyping such incursions, even as a tight-lipped governmentremains reluctant to come clean on the actual extent and frequency of the Chineseintrusions.

To the delight of the autocrats in Beijing who tightly control the flow of information in theircountry, including through online censors, New Delhi has reined in its home media. And inresponse to governmental intervention at the highest level, Indian news organisationsessentially have clamped down on further reporting of the Chinese incursions.

The message this sends to Beijing, however inadvertently, is that when the world's biggestautocracy builds up pressure, the world's largest democracy is willing to tame its mediacoverage even if it entails dispensing half-truths and flogging distortions.

Beijing is sure to be emboldened by the precedent that has been set. Next time, when it isunhappy with Indian media coverage of another issue sensitive to its interests, it simply willissue a diplomatic demarche to New Delhi to discipline its media, the way it did on bordertensions.

Given Beijing's growing hard line stance towards India since 2006, New Delhi's attempt to

sweep serious issues under the rug is baffling. The facts, even if unpalatable, should beallowed to speak for themselves. New Delhi's oft-repeated line in recent weeks has beenthat Chinese incursions are at last year's level, so there is no need to worry. But 2008brought a record number of incursions, with the Indian defence establishment reporting thatthe number of such intrusions went from 140 in 2007 to 270 last year that is, incursionsnearly doubled in the space of one year.

In addition, there were 2,285 reported instances of 'aggressive border patrolling' by Chineseforces in 2008. This summer, as the army chief publicly said, there were '21 incursions inJune, 20 in July and 24 in August.'

The key point to note is that China has opened pressure points against India across the

Himalayas, with border incidents occurring in all the four sectors -- Ladakh, Uttarakhand-Himachal, Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh. Yet, such is the Indian government's continuingopacity that it is loath to clarify the actual border situation, even as it conveniently blames themedia for overplaying the incursions although information about them has been coming fromofficial channels.

If the threat from an increasingly assertive and ambitious China is to be contained, Indiamust have an honest and open debate on its diplomatic and military options, including howgaps in its defences can be plugged and what it will take to build a credible deterrent.

The media has a crucial role to play in such a debate, both by bringing out the facts and

providing a platform for discussion. Still, New Delhi has sought to make its home media thescapegoat. Even more odd is that it has taken its cue from Beijing. It was the Chinese

8/14/2019 India muzzles media in response to Chinese incursions

2/3

foreign ministry which first accused Indian media of stirring up tensions. 'I have noted thatsome Indian media are releasing inaccurate information; I wonder what their aim is,'spokeswoman Jiang Yu had said.

Soon thereafter, Beijing discreetly began exerting diplomatic pressure on New Delhi to

domesticate its media.

In response, Indian government functionaries have rushed, one by one, to make light of theChinese incursions, although the Chinese leadership has studiously kept mum on border-related developments. Not a word has come from any Chinese leader; by contrast, almostthe entire Indian security leadership from the prime minister down has gone public -- not toclarify what is happening along the border but to claim there is no cause for alarm. However,by being disturbingly opaque, New Delhi only adds to the public unease.

The Indian public indeed has been offered mostly one-line statements from governmentfunctionaries. Here's a sample:

In the first week of September, the neophyte external affairs minister offered this one-liner: 'Let me go on record to say that this has been one of the most peacefulboundaries that we have had as compared to boundary lines with other countries.'From the Maurya Sheraton's presidential suite, where S M Krishna was ensconcedfor more than 100 days after taking office, everything looks 'most peaceful,' not justthe India-China border.

In the following week, the foreign secretary claimed there has been 'no significantincrease' in Chinese incursions. That suggests the incursions have increased but notsignificantly. But who is to judge whether any increase is significant or insignificant ifthose in authority divulge no information?

The foreign secretary was followed by the prime minister, who laconically indicatedhe was in touch with the 'highest levels' of the Chinese government while implicitlyacknowledging that a better flow of government information was necessary toimprove media reporting.

A day later, the army chief was asked to speak up. 'The prime minister has just madea statement that there has not been any more incursions or transgressions ascompared to last year. They are at the same level. So there is no cause of worry orconcern,' General Deepak Kapoor declared September 19. If the level of intrusionsremains at last year's level, that in itself should be a cause for concern because itshows China is keeping India under unremitting pressure.

Then came the national security adviser, who was loquacious but not enlightening ina television interview. 'Almost all the so-called incursions which have taken placehave taken place in areas which in a sense are viewed as being disputed by one side

or the other,' said M K Narayanan. Really? What about Sikkim, whose border withTibet is formally recognised by China? And what about Uttarakhand -- the middlesector -- where the Line of Control was clarified through an exchange of maps withChina in 2001?

More fundamentally, why should New Delhi offer explanations or justifications for theChinese incursions? If such intrusions really are due to differing perceptions aboutthe line of control, let the Chinese say that. But note: Beijing hasn't proffered thatexcuse.

Significantly, the NSA admitted that the Chinese have started intruding a 'little deeper' thanbefore, even as he maintained the government's now-familiar line that there has been 'hardly

any increase' in Chinese cross-frontier forays. He went on to say, 'China certainly sees us asa rival. They wish to be numero uno in this part of the world.' Yet he complacently

8/14/2019 India muzzles media in response to Chinese incursions

3/3

concluded, 'I don't think there is any reason for us to feel particularly concerned as to what'shappening.' Didn't such smugness bring the surprise 1962 invasion?

Unfortunately, even while denying any media report, New Delhi tends to be so economicalwith words that it leaves questions hanging. For example, the government has yet to

categorically deny that Chinese forces opened fire across the settled Sikkim border in lateAugust. It merely described as 'factually inaccurate' a September 15 newspaper report thattwo Indo-Tibetan Border Police soldiers were wounded in such firing. But another nationalnewspaper had on August 28 front-paged the trading of cross-border fire in the same Sikkimarea -- Kerang.

If New Delhi wants to ensure Himalayan peace, pulling the wool over public eyes is certainlynot the way. It is the government's responsibility to keep the public informed through mediaof new security threats and the steps it is taking to effectively defend the borders.

Journalists seeking information from the government on the Himalayan frontier complain thatthey get the runaround. Rather than stonewall or obfuscate, the government ought to readily

disseminate information. Not all information released in the public domain can be venomousto diplomacy.

Good public diplomacy, at home and abroad, indeed can complement official diplomacy anddefense preparedness. Indian opacity on Chinese-triggered border incidents only helpsbolster China's projection of its 'peaceful rise.'

By trying to mask the actual border situation, New Delhi seriously risks playing into Beijing'shands and spurring on greater Chinese belligerence.

Brahma Chellaney, professor of strategic studies at the independent Centre for Policy

Research, is the author, most recently, of Asian Juggernaut: The Rise of China, India andJapan