The Delhi Police arrested Prabir Purkayastha, editor of NewsClick, on October 3, 2023, as part of an investigation into allegations of Chinese funding for his media platform. The proceedings were initiated under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), which is typically applied in cases involving terrorism and national security. Those who go in under the Act tend to not come out soon.
The investigations against the journalist gained momentum following a report by The New York Times—ironically enough, a great bastion of the brown-in-skin, white-at-heart Indian liberal—on August 5, which claimed the news channel received significant financial support from Neville Roy Singham, an American billionaire and founder of a tech company.
Singham denied the allegations and said he had no ties to the Chinese government. I had critiqued NYT and the government in a column of mine at the time. There were confused cries of protest and outrage from both sides of the spectrum. There were, too, lusty demands for prosecuting Singham on vague and vengeful patriotic aspirations as the money he allegedly piped in promoted Chinese interests. Nothing came off the patriotic fervor against Singham. Or China, as it turns out.
On May 15, 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that Purkayastha's arrest was illegal, citing the Enforcement Directorate's failure to provide proper written grounds for his detention. He was released on bail.
Some two months later, on July 24, the finance ministry tabled the Economic Survey of India for 2023-2024, and discreetly advised a ‘nuanced’ approach to China in terms of foreign direct investments. Essentially, the Survey recommended opening doors to the Chinese capital. It seemed to surprise few, certainly none of them patriots.
Was there a connection between the momentous discovery that the journalist’s arrest was suddenly illegal and the fact that the Economic Survey found China equally cleared of all villainy? Surely, you couldn’t keep an Indian citizen in jail for an alleged partnership with Chinese capital when the whole country was looking for a larger share of it? What turns enemies into friends? Money.
Last fortnight, India said it had resolved the border issue since the Galwan Valley clash with China that killed 20 Indian soldiers—and it certainly looked like India had been worsted, despite patriotic padding up of the factual event—in July 2020.
And last week, on the sidelines of the BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia, PM Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping shook hands, Modi looking at Xi, Xi looking at the world, as if nothing had happened between 2014, when the two leaders shared one swing and many sweets in Ahmedabad, and now—except Galwan and 20 dead soldiers. The interrupted honeymoon was back on track, perhaps with some added caution on India’s side. China is too big to care.
That Modi and his government are executing these somersaults in India’s interests is beyond doubt. India currently faces a trade deficit with China, reported at around $85 billion. To address this, India is looking at options to shift from importing Chinese goods to encouraging Chinese companies to set up manufacturing within India. By doing so, India could potentially export to third-party markets, such as the US and Europe.
A side benefit would be to help the West to lessen their dependence on China as the sole supply-chain source. But this looks a bit unreal, at least for the near future. In a recent interview, Apple CEO Tim Cook said the reason why China is the workshop of the world is the quality and quantity of its tooling engineers. He said even in the US, the number of tooling engineers can perhaps fill a large room; in China, they fill up many football grounds. India is way behind in this respect.
China has been expanding its Belt and Road Initiative globally and while India is not an official partner, increased economic interactions could open indirect corridors for Indian interests.
Infrastructure and tech investments in India would allow Chinese companies to establish logistical networks, tapping into routes that could enhance the connectivity of the BRI without India’s direct participation. Nevertheless, India stands to benefit.
Still, the fact remains that the BJP and sections of the media that supports it went on and on painting the giant friend-turned-enemy-turned-friend across the Himalayas in the darkest shades. Opposition leaders like Rahul Gandhi and Sonia Gandhi were portrayed as having signed secret agreements with the Chinese Communist Party to sabotage India’s interests. What happens to those charges? Because effectively speaking, those were allegations of sedition.
No such questions are being raised now. China has overnight become a benign neighbor. Most of us seem to have pretty much accommodated the U-turn without asking for a clear explanation.
To be sure, the diffusion of the border issue was always vital. The trade deals are for India’s good. To be sure, too, we are back to the Nehruvian ideal of India-China bhai-bhai. Does the present government then subscribe to the Nehruvian notion of ties with China as a practical necessity and not an expression of misfired romance?
Indeed, if you were a true-blood patriot and snarling at China till the other day, how do you explain that jingoism now? Should you feel foolish at the excess of the enmity you conjured up? Is patriotism an on-now, off-now project whose tap is in the government’s hands?
Purkayastha is out, fortunately. But those others in jail for years now under similar charges would like to know when they would cease to be worthy of the UAPA, since the metrics of patriotism seem—for good reasons or bad—so arbitrary, so fluid.
(Views are personal)
(cpsurendran@gmail.com)
C P Surendran | Poet, novelist, and screenplay writer. His latest novel is One Love and the Many Lives of Osip B