Historically, China and India have found it difficult to handle each other’s sensitivities. Because the two Asian powers are neighbours, there is a geopolitical element in their perceptions of one another. This problem existed when they were weak and it remains now that they are becoming more powerful. In fact, Nehru perceived it half a century ago. In November 1950, after China’s army had been deployed in Tibet, Nehru wrote a note to his cabinet ministers in which he argued for a non-confrontational approach in their debates. Having said that India could not afford a conflict with China over Tibet and that India could not ‘save Tibet’ even if it had decided to fight China, Nehru pointed out that ‘as two Asian powers with…[an expansionist] tendency, it would be difficult for them to deal with their relations’. ^[4] It is clear that Nehru’s view could have stemmed from a geopolitical calculation. In the history of international relations, there are too many examples of difficulties in relations between two big neighbours. In 1954, when Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai first visited New Delhi, the two sides determined to initiate the ‘Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence’, which laid the foundation for sustainable development of the bilateral relationship. It was indeed a very idealistic framework for the two Asian giants, but the differences between the two sides in geopolitical interests that later events exposed reflected the fragility of the framework. If this was the situation when the two countries were very weak, what about now, when the two sides are rising rapidly in the international community?

Regarding the rise of Chindia, there are other things to be considered—and one is the two countries’ comparative position in terms of economic power. Clearly, China’s economic totality and growth rate exceed those of India. China’s economic reform started more than 10 years earlier than India’s, and, in the 15 years after India launched its economic reform, China’s average annual growth rate was still much higher than that of India. These two factors indicate that, in terms of the general level of economic advancement, China has gone far ahead, whether in terms of gross domestic product (GDP) now, or its prospects for the future. ^[5] Even if India can sustain average annual growth of 8 per cent for the next 10 years, most predictions estimate that China will be able to match or exceed that rate. ^[6] That would make the disparity between China and India even larger in the years to come. In terms of trade, the disparity is even bigger, with China’s total trade volume reaching US$1.7 trillion in 2006—making it the third-largest trading state in the world—while that of India reached about US$300 billion. These figures make the case for the simultaneous rise of China and India seem less convincing.

The rise of Chindia is a hot topic in the international media, which also focuses on comparison. India’s potential is stressed, however, because India is believed to enjoy many advantages that China does not have, such as a multi-party political system, a fully competitive business environment, an independent judicial system, and so on. While India’s democracy is appreciated, the more important point seems to lie at the strategic level. India attracts attention from the Western media not so much because of its economic power, but for its potential overall status in Asia vis-à-vis that of China. In Washington, this is elaborated as a counterweight against the rise of China. At this point, the simultaneous rise of China and India would be treated as a variable in the game of balance of power, for the two Asian giants have a number of unsolved problems and it is likely that India, like the Western powers, does not want to see a hegemonic China. Such a perception is perhaps well accepted in India, but not in the sense that India should follow a containment strategy; rather, India would like to use it for its own agenda. The worries that Western powers have about China are not a negative element as far as India’s development is concerned. From the Chinese perspective, the key is, then, how to look at the rise of Chindia and whether it is a viable concept.