Trust, Credibility and Soft Power Diplomacy: India and China
Posted on : September 7, 2021Author : Ankita Chatterjee
Soft power diplomacy is one of the most subtle and creative ways for any nation to flaunt its cultural and literary side in amassing credibility from the world without any violent and forced means. Advocated by Joseph Nye, the notion of soft power is the ability of a state to achieve its objectives through attraction and persuasion rather than by means of hard power—military might and economic sanctions. He suggested that the main sources of soft power are a country’s history, its culture, domestic political arrangements, and civil society.
The two Asian giants, China and India are both ancient civilizations who have gifted the world with many of their respective ideals and cultures. Both, have considerable soft power resources at their disposal and have also discovered great opportunities to achieve their main policy objectives, through attraction and persuasion rather than any coercive means. It is, hence, of no surprise that China and India emerged as potential contenders for great power status.
Location of India at the very geographic center of the South Asia-Indian Ocean region enabled Indian civilizational influences to spread widely across its eastern seaboard. However, the vigor and aggressiveness of China’s efforts to make itself and its policies attractive and appealing to the public and governments of the South Asian region in particular, has meant that Indian soft power faces a new and very strong competitor.
Sinicization is the process by which non-Chinese societies are influenced by Chinese culture, in areas ranging from culture, language or social norms, to issues such as diet, writing, industry, education, language, law, lifestyle, philosophy, religion, science, technology, culture or value systems. China has sought to promote Sinicization and enhance its soft power since the late 1970s when Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping initiated Beijing’s reforms and open door policy. Beijing’s economic growth, its stability, generous spending on the United Nations (UN) peace keeping missions and contributions to varied international organizations have garnered much global appreciation. Furthermore, China has also fostered people-to-people contacts by increasing the number of foreign students studying in China, tourism, and the Chinese Confucius institutes abroad. These achievements and initiatives have helped China to increase her influence and become a destination for foreign investment and thereby, improve her image globally.
Unlike China which has worked to expand and enhance its soft power since the late 1970s, India began concerted efforts to promote its soft image around the world at the turn of the millennium. However, like China, India’s soft power is underpinned by its civilizational heritage and cultural prowess. India possesses considerable soft power resources stemming from its ancient civilization, universalist and iridescent culture, democratic political institutions, the Bollywood industry, and its Third World leadership role. India’s pioneering advocacy of “nonviolence” and her leading role in the Non-Aligned Movement are widely respected. Nonviolence, respect for other peoples and cultures, religious diversity, pluralistic credentials, mutual development, and scientific query have always been the hallmarks of Indian soft power strategy. They have made India a stabilizing force.
Unlike many other nations that have homogenised or rather “westernized” their culture, India’s diverse yet coherent cultural fabric spreads across the length and breadth of the country. Furthermore, the rise of India’s global stature in recent decades at various multilateral forums, the increasing popularity of Yoga and Ayurveda, and the world community embracing Namaste as a greeting during the ongoing pandemic are some of the most evident examples of Indian soft power.
Both the Asian giants have invested in soft power to strategically advance their interests without locking horns with entrenched stakeholders. Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has emerged as the most crucial instrument in China’s soft power diplomacy in South Asia. With its aim to connect Asia with Africa and Europe via land and maritime networks to enhance regional integration, unimpeded trade and financial integration, stimulating economic growth, the BRI models the ancient Silk Route, with the intention of reviving its past glory in a novel way. India, however, feels encircled by this ambitious programme. Over the years, Beijing and New Delhi have been engaged in rivalry rooted in geopolitical issues that include the Sino-India border dispute. While this heightens friction between the two regional powers, Beijing might use its diplomatic edge to negatively influence South Asian relations with New Delhi. A number of state-controlled Confucius Institutes have mushroomed in South Asian countries like Maldives, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal. In addition to this, China has also become a crucial source of development assistance, including shaping infrastructure, giving loans and academic scholarships to these South Asian nations. The aid in turn, China’s strategic advantage and allows it access to new markets in the region as well as to natural resources and minerals.
India cultural affinity with most of these South Asian nations is closer but she falls short in terms of economic aid. However, China‘s proactive role in South Asia is impelling India to be more positively involved with the region. There is a growing need for the South Asian giant to connect with neighbours. As a responsible regional entity, India has, indeed, responded to natural disasters and other crises in the region. It is also active in conflict-ridden Afghanistan in a substantive fashion and is playing a key role in the country‘s reconstruction and infrastructural efforts. China, has had limited success in ameliorating its negative image worldwide as an aggressive regional power which discourages freedom of expression and individual rights. Nevertheless, its massive economic assistance has indebted most Southeast and South Asian recipients.
Soft power, however, is about building two things: credibility and trust. It is noted that that India has a march over China when it comes to soft power because of the trust factor and democratic system that has stood the test of time since WWII. Soft power is quite difficult to measure. In this regard, the Lowy Institute in Australia has attempted to juxtapose the foreign policy influence, cultural influence and political influence of India and china. In diplomatic influence, overall, India ranks sixth and China ranks first among 25 Asian powers. On networks, India nearly matches China in the number of regional embassies it has but is considerably behind in the number of embassies worldwide. Multilaterally, India matches China in terms of regional memberships, but, India’s contributions (0.8%) to the UN capital budget are completely dwarfed by Chinese contributions (11.7%). Lowy’s overall measure of cultural influence ranks India in fourth place and China in second place in Asia. With regard to cultural projection, India scores better on Google searches abroad of its newspapers and its television/radio broadcasts. China does better on several other indicators. For instance, India has only nine brands in the list of the top 500 global brands whereas China lists 73. On the UNESCO World Heritage sites, India has 37 while China has 53. Besides, when it comes to passport holders, the Chinese citizens can travel visa-free to 74 countries where Indians can only do so to 60. Also, in terms of information flows, in 2016–17, India hosted a mere 24,000 Asian students in tertiary education institutions whereas China hosted 2,25,000. As for tourist arrivals from all over the world, India received 17 million, while China received 63 million. Observably, the comparison between India and China on soft power is mixed – while China surpasses India on some counts as per the study, the difference in some cases is not that conspicuously large.
Moreover, Confucius Institutes have assumed larger cultural ambassadorial roles from the Chinese perspective as they symbolise China‘s cultural diplomacy. India has conceived of a similar institutional role through the Indian Council For Cultural Relations (ICCR). Bollywood films and music, Indian food, yoga, IT and higher education are the most potent Indian exports that have been earning strategic gains. These exports have strong competitive advantages and are as effective in South Asia as in other parts of the world. Regular screening of Indian movies, promoting classical dance and music extravaganza, education fairs, yoga shows and IT exhibitions is serving India remarkably well.
China and India‘s growing strategic presence in Asia has been accompanied by a relative decline in influence of the United States in the region. These gradual but far-reaching processes have impacted the balance and structure of power in Asia. India‘s efforts to strengthen its soft power in Asia have interesting strategic implications for a region that is perceived as becoming China-dominated. When it comes to technological soft power, China clearly in at a better position than India. The overwhelming popularity of TikTok, WeChat and other Chinese applications is part of China’s cultural and technological colonization. However, these Chinese apps have gained notoriety as they have been blamed for stealing the data of the citizens of foreign countries and exporting them to China.
India’s soft power resources have been used to attract international investors and to create an image rather than an instrument to exert influence. While it does possess an edge in the cultural and educational dimensions, it is extremely challenging for India to match China in economic assistance, given India’s current stage of economic development. India, therefore, has to follow a carefully thought out strategy for optimizing its soft power leverage in the region and ensure that its financial limitations are offset by cultural and educational advantages, with country-specific variations wherever required.
References
1] Kanti Bajpai, “Why does China consistently beat India on soft power?”, The Indian Express, June 23, 2021
2] Palit, P. S., & Palit, A. (2011). Strategic influence of soft power: inferences for India from Chinese engagement of South and Southeast Asia. ICRIER Policy Series, 3, 1-27.
http://www.icrier.org/pdf/Parama_sinha_palit.pdf
3] Tara Rao, “The extent of China’s soft power in South Asia”, Observer Research Foundation, 11 July, 2020
https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/extent-china-soft-power-south-asia/
4] Shah, S. H., Hasnat, H., & Rosefielde, S. (2017). Comparative analysis of Chinese and Indian soft power strategy. Asian Politics & Policy, 9(2), 268-288
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aspp.12313
5] Dipanjan Roy Chaudhury, “Unlike China, India’s soft power built through trust, credibility and democracy”, Economic Times, Nov 19, 2020,
6] Palit, P. S., & Palit, A. (2011). Strategic influence of soft power: inferences for India from Chinese engagement of South and Southeast Asia. ICRIER Policy Series, 3, 1-27.
https://icrier.org/pdf/Policy_Series_No_3.pdf
Ankita Chatterjee
Intern, Asia in Global Affairs
Leave a Reply