Opinion | Modi-Xi Meet, And Everything That Was Left Unsaid At Tianjin

The global stage these days is bathed in an inevitable orange tint, associated with US President Donald Trump. This, unfortunately, imparts a somewhat florid colour to reportage on the Modi-Xi summit in Tianjin at the sidelines of the SCO summit. As it is with their hand-holding, hugs and camaraderie, Xi, Putin and Modi not only sent their own message to Trump but contributed to some breathless reportage.

But the reality is that this important summit comes along a trajectory that took off well before Trump became the President of the US. After the process of putting the 2020 Galwan genie back in the bottle in October 2024, India and China began a re-engagement process.  Following the “pull aside” conversation between Modi and Xi in 2022 in Bali around the G-20 summit, they held their first formal talks in five years in Kazan on the sidelines of the 16th BRICS summit in October 2024.

Also Read | The 'Inner Circle' That Runs America, And Why India Needs To Court It

The Big Border Question

At the Modi-Xi Tianjin meeting, the key difference was in the emphasis placed on the border dispute relative to overall bilateral ties. Modi told Xi that “after the disengagement at the border, an atmosphere of peace and stability is now in place”. He emphasised the importance of peace on the border “for continued development of bilateral relations”. On the other hand, Xi reiterated the Chinese position when he said that the two countries “should not allow the boundary question to define the overall China-India relations”. However, both agreed that they were “partners not rivals” and needed to ensure they would not allow “differences to become disputes”.  And both agreed on their commitment to “a fair, reasonable and mutually acceptable” settlement of the border issue.

The outcome of the Tianjin meeting of the two leaders was itself fairly anodyne; the key agreements had already been arrived at through talks between Indian and Chinese officials in the last two months.

A Vehicle For India And China

Note that the Sino-Indian meeting in Tianjin is on the sidelines of a multilateral meeting. It does not really have the cachet of a bilateral summit arising from an official visit. But this does not detract from its importance arising from both the need to repair India-China ties as well as the current geopolitical moment that is largely coloured by Donald Trump. 

Earlier, Modi had not set much store by the SCO. In May 2023, the government dropped plans to host the SCO summit in New Delhi and instead decided to host an online summit.  But this time around, Modi was an active presence, interacting publicly and animatedly with leaders like Putin and Xi. Given its anti-terrorism background, the SCO condemned the Pahalgam terrorist massacre, but this was juxtaposed uncomfortably with a condemnation of the Jaffer Express and Khuzdar incidents in Pakistan, for which Islamabad blames New Delhi.

Also Read | SCO, And Why Trump Must Know The World Doesn't Really Dance To His Tunes

In essence, the SCO meeting was the vehicle upon which India and China have ridden to power their re-engagement. The groundwork for the summit had been done in recent months, with National Security Advisor Ajit Doval visiting Beijing in June and the External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar in mid-July. Their talks led to the substantive outcome of Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi's visit to New Delhi in August, when he met Jaishankar. Wang, who also doubles as the Special Representative (SR) of China, met his counterpart, Ajit Doval, as well. 

Consistent Progress

There were substantial decisions taken in the SR's meeting, the most important being to push the talks for a border settlement in line with the Agreement on the Political Parameters and Guiding Principles of 2005. The two sides also decided to set up an expert group under the Working Mechanism for Consultation and Cooperation (WMCC) to see if they could obtain an “early harvest” in the final border settlement. Though not stated, this relates to the possibility of settling the Tibet-Sikkim boundary, which was arrived at by the Anglo-Chinese Convention of 1890.

Given the positive experience of talks between higher commanders in the western sector in resolving the eastern Ladakh issue, the two sides have also decided to expand the mechanism to the central and eastern sectors. Senior commanders held 22 rounds of talks between 2020 and 2024 to untangle the eastern Ladakh issue.

No, India Isn't Dumping The West

The SCO meeting may have provided the opportunity to push India-China re-engagement, but this should not imply that India is ready to dump the West, notwithstanding the optics that the summit provided. There are serious structural reasons why India needs to remain a partner of the US, even while maintaining its friendship with Russia. While the US offers a big market and source of investment for India, India's non-oil trade with Russia is anaemic. As for China, as long as its border remains disputed, and Beijing's partnership with Islamabad remains “higher than the mountains”, there is a limit to the India-China entente. 

Also Read | Trump Is Indeed Making A Country Great Again. But It's China

The underlying rationale for the India-US connect remains, especially because their current estrangement seems to be based more on clashing egos (of Modi and Trump) as well as misguided policies (US tariffs). Sooner rather than later, they will find a way around their obstacles. Yet, the present episode will not be forgotten; it will only underscore India's long suspicion of US unreliability and reinforce the belief in strategic autonomy.

As for China, India's relations with it have always figured a permutation and combination of the 4 Cs - cooperation, competition,  conflict and containment. At each point in time, one or the other issue is salient. A while ago, it was “conflict” and “containment”. Now it seems to be “cooperation” and “competition”.

(The writer is a Distinguished Fellow, Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author