Daily Editorial Analysis 31 October 2026

Can India and China Coexist Peacefully?

Context

• India-China relations are characterised by managed coexistence, combining diplomatic engagement with persistent border tensions and strategic mistrust.
• Despite being two ancient civilisations, both countries struggle to establish lasting peace.
• Historical grievances, territorial disputes and geopolitical competition undermine mutual confidence.
• However, conflict is neither inevitable nor desirable. Peaceful coexistence, strategic stability and diplomatic dialogue are essential for securing long-term peace in Asia.

An Analysis of Divide and Development Between India and China

• Historical Grievances and Border Disputes

  • The 1962 Sino-Indian War remains a defining moment in bilateral relations.
  • China’s military action shattered India’s confidence after years of Hindi–Chini Bhai Bhai
  • Territorial disagreements over Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh subsequently deepened mutual suspicion.
  • The 2020 Galwan Valley clash, which killed 20 Indian soldiers, further damaged relations. Disagreements over patrolling arrangements and territorial claims continue to threaten peace along the Line of Actual Control (LAC).
  • The difficult Himalayan terrain and the absence of a mutually agreed boundary complicate resolution.
  • China’s rejection of the McMahon Line adds to tensions in the eastern sector. Nevertheless, historical grievances must not become permanent obstacles to reconciliation.

• Rajiv Gandhi’s Diplomatic Initiative

  • In 1988, Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi visited China and met Deng Xiaoping, creating a turning point in bilateral relations.
  • The initiative demonstrated that political dialogue could reduce tensions.
  • An important understanding was that the boundary dispute could be addressed separately from other aspects of cooperation.
  • However, subsequent developments weakened this approach.
  • Despite agreements and confidence-building measures, lasting trust remains elusive.
  • Reviving the diplomatic spirit of 1988 could help manage contemporary disagreements.

• Geopolitical Competition and the United States

  • India’s growing partnership with the United States, particularly through the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD), has intensified Chinese suspicions.
  • Beijing frequently interprets India’s participation as part of an American strategy to contain China.
  • India’s international partnerships, however, should not automatically be viewed as preparations for confrontation.
  • India must preserve its strategic autonomy, while China must respect India’s independent foreign policy.
  • Both countries should replace zero-sum competition with mutual respect and constructive engagement.

Is China an Existential Threat to India?

• China’s economic influence, technological advancement and military modernisation make it a major global power.
• Nevertheless, this does not mean that conflict with India is inevitable.
• China seeks to achieve its long-term ambition of becoming a leading world power by 2049, while India prioritises economic growth and national development.
• A prolonged conflict would impose enormous economic and strategic costs on both countries.
• Therefore, military confrontation cannot sustainably resolve bilateral disputes.
• Both governments must ensure military restraint, maintain communication and prevent unintended escalation along the Himalayan border.

The Way Forward for India: Understanding China Is Essential

• Assessing China’s Military Capabilities

  • The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) have advanced significantly in missile technology, naval power, surveillance and amphibious operations.
  • However, sophisticated weapons do not guarantee victory in every conflict. Geography, logistics and operational preparedness also determine military effectiveness.
  • India possesses important geographical and operational advantages in the high Himalayas. Nevertheless, it must strengthen border infrastructure, intelligence and defence preparedness.
  • China’s military modernisation should be treated as a strategic reality without automatically assuming an imminent attack.

• Understanding China’s Strategic Intentions

  • India must distinguish between China’s actual intentions and perceptions shaped by political rhetoric.
  • Accurate assessment of Chinese intentions can prevent unnecessary confrontations.
  • In 2005, under President Hu Jintao, China and India signed an agreement promoting a long-term constructive and cooperative partnership.
  • It emphasised that neither country should use or threaten force against the other and that the interests of settled border populations should be protected during boundary negotiations.
  • These principles remain relevant. India must combine diplomatic engagement with vigilance and credible defence capabilities, while China must acknowledge India’s legitimate security concerns.

• The Importance of Historical and Political Understanding

  • Understanding China’s history, political structures and strategic culture is essential for effective policymaking.
  • The evolution of China’s territorial boundaries, including during the Qing dynasty, demonstrates the complexity of its historical experiences and national identity.
  • India must develop a deeper understanding of Chinese history, strategic culture and decision-making to avoid costly miscalculations.
  • China, similarly, must recognise India’s historical experiences, security concerns and aspirations as an independent global power.
  • Mutual understanding does not require either country to compromise its legitimate national interests.

Conclusion

• Despite historical grievances, unresolved territorial disputes and geopolitical competition, peaceful coexistence remains achievable. Renewed diplomacy, effective border-management mechanisms, military restraint and realistic assessments of strategic intentions are essential.
• India must remain vigilant without allowing suspicion to dominate its foreign policy.
• China must respect India’s legitimate interests and avoid actions that undermine mutual trust.
• By combining diplomatic engagement with credible defence preparedness, India and China can transform managed coexistence into a durable partnership, contributing to regional peace and global stability.

Can India and China Coexist Peacefully? FAQs

Q1. What characterises India–China relations today?
Ans. India–China relations are characterised by managed coexistence and strategic mistrust.

Q2. What was the significance of Rajiv Gandhi’s 1988 visit to China?
Ans. Rajiv Gandhi’s visit revived diplomatic engagement and improved bilateral relations.

Q3. What caused the 2020 Galwan Valley clash to become significant?
Ans. The clash killed 20 Indian soldiers and intensified border tensions.

Q4. Why is understanding China important for India?
Ans. Understanding China helps India avoid miscalculations and manage bilateral disputes.

Q5. How can India and China achieve lasting peace?
Ans. India and China can achieve lasting peace through diplomacy, military restraint and mutual understanding.

Source: The Hindu

Good Governance – The Signal That Matters for India’s Next Generation

Context

• There is the need to examine the difference between India during the 2004–2014 period, described as the “lost decade”, and the India being built since 2014.
• It argues that the real measure of governance is not political rhetoric or the number of schemes announced, but the tangible improvement in citizens’ lives.
• The central question for India’s young electorate is whether governance creates an environment where success depends on merit, skills and hard work rather than political connections.

Transforming the Citizen-State Relationship

• From patronage to merit:

  • During 2004–2014, economic opportunities were allegedly influenced by political connections rather than merit. Contracts, credit and capital often favoured influential business groups over deserving entrepreneurs.
  • For example, a 2012 Credit Suisse report highlighted the concentration of bank borrowing among major business groups, while small entrepreneurs struggled to access credit.
  • Good governance must ensure equal opportunity, transparency and merit-based access to resources, reducing the role of patronage.

• Direct benefit transfer (DBT) – Eliminating intermediaries:

  • Earlier, a former Prime Minister acknowledged that only a fraction of welfare expenditure reached intended beneficiaries.
  • The JAM Trinity (Jan Dhan, Aadhaar and Mobile) transformed welfare delivery by enabling direct transfers and reducing intermediary leakages. For example, over ₹53 lakh crore transferred directly to citizens’ bank accounts since 2014.
  • DBT represents a governance reform rather than merely a technological innovation, strengthening transparency, accountability and financial inclusion.

Poverty Reduction and Inclusive Development

• Multidimensional poverty:

  • According to the NITI Aayog figures, nearly 250 million Indians exited multidimensional poverty over nine years.
  • The multidimensional poverty headcount ratio declined from 29.17% in 2013–14 to 11.28% in 2022–23.
  • This is mainly driven by substantial transfers to farmers, including approximately ₹4.47 lakh crore under direct assistance programmes.
• Significance: Effective governance can create a virtuous cycle of poverty reduction, economic security, dignity and improved human development.

Fiscal Discipline – Welfare versus Capital Formation

• Welfare expenditure, when financed through unsustainable borrowing, can undermine long-term development.
• Case of Karnataka:
  • Borrowings reportedly increased from ₹90,280 crore to ₹1.04 lakh crore in a year.
  • This increase has been linked to expenditure on guarantee schemes, and capital expenditure has been crowded out.
  • Reduced capital investment can constrain infrastructure development, industrial capacity and employment generation.
• Keralam:
• • A June 2026 White Paper reportedly documented ₹5.07 lakh crore in debt accumulated over a decade.
  • The State was reportedly in RBI overdraft for 84 days during 2025.
  • Capital expenditure stood at 1.3% of GSDP, substantially below the national average.
• Key concern: Excessive revenue expenditure and debt servicing can reduce the fiscal space available for productive investment.

Political Disruption versus Democratic Accountability

• The right to protest:

  • As peaceful protest and dissent are essential to democracy, citizens must retain the non-negotiable right to question and challenge those in power.
  • However, it distinguishes legitimate dissent from the deliberate disruption of governance for political gains, for example,
    • Repeated disruption of Parliament to prevent legislative proceedings.
    • Blocking highways as a pressure tactic.
    • Creating an artificial appearance of crisis without presenting a credible alternative policy programme.
  • Such practices substitute political noise for substantive debate and weaken institutional functioning.

• Impact on young citizens:

  • This –
    • Creates cynicism and reduces public participation.
    • Encourages the misconception that creating chaos is equivalent to demonstrating governing ability.
    • Weakens democratic accountability by diverting attention from measurable governance outcomes.
  • India’s large youth population makes the development of informed political values particularly important for the future of democracy.

Governance and State-Level Development

• The below state-level examples illustrate the relationship between governance and economic outcomes.
• For example,
  • UP: Transformation from a BIMARU state to a ₹36 lakh crore economy, accompanied by revenue surplus and improved investor confidence.
  • Maharashtra: Leadership in foreign direct investment (FDI), with more than half of India’s FDI reportedly received in a single quarter.
  • Karnataka: Rising borrowings and welfare expenditure allegedly constraining capital investment.
  • Keralam: High public debt, fiscal stress and low capital expenditure limiting future investment.
• The broader argument is that good governance should be evaluated through outcomes such as infrastructure, employment, investment, fiscal sustainability and public service delivery.

Governance, Technology and Institutional Accountability

• Both governance and technology should be designed around citizens rather than those administering the system.
• Effective governance requires –
  • Transparency in public expenditure and decision-making.
  • Accountability for the use of public resources.
  • Efficient delivery of public services.
  • Merit-based access to economic opportunities.
  • Sustainable fiscal management and investment in productive assets.
• The objective is to create institutions that empower citizens rather than make them dependent on political patronage.

Way Forward – Outcome-Oriented Governance

• Outcome-based budgeting: Link public expenditure with measurable improvements in citizens’ welfare.
• Fiscal prudence: Balance welfare commitments with infrastructure creation and long-term investment.
• Participatory governance: Protect dissent while ensuring that democratic institutions remain functional.
• Institutional accountability: Strengthen transparency, social audits and citizen-centric public service delivery.
• Youth engagement: Promote informed political participation based on policies and governance outcomes rather than partisan narratives.

Conclusion

• The true test of democracy is when governments expand citizens’ opportunities, uphold accountability and create sustainable prosperity.
• Good governance must enable citizens to succeed through their abilities rather than political connections.
• India’s future depends on choosing institutions that build lasting public assets and leave the next generation better equipped to prosper.

Good Governance FAQs

Q1. How does the JAM Trinity improve governance?

Ans. It enables DBT, reduces leakages and intermediaries, and promotes transparency and financial inclusion.

Q2. How does good governance contribute to poverty reduction?

Ans. Through efficient welfare delivery, financial inclusion and access to economic opportunities.

Q3. How can excessive welfare expenditure undermine fiscal sustainability?

Ans. Unproductive borrowing and rising revenue expenditure can crowd out capital investment, increase debt, etc.

Q4. What is the difference between democratic dissent and political disruption?

Ans. Democratic dissent promotes accountability, whereas deliberate disruption weakens constructive policymaking.

Q5. What measures can strengthen outcome-oriented governance in India?

Ans. Outcome-based budgeting, fiscal prudence, transparency, social audits and citizen-centric service delivery.

Source: IE

‹ ›