A Historic Reversal: Echoes of the Past in India's Recent Debacle

Let me briefly recap our earlier stance: On May 8th, the day after the India-Pakistan air clash, we asserted that India's devastating defeat had irreversibly shattered its path to industrialization. Mounting evidence now corroborates this, with more to surface in the future.

Consider the following developments:

1. G7 Summit Exclusion: From June 15th to 17th, the G7 summit will convene in Canada. Historically, India received early invitations, even positioning itself prominently in summit photos. However, this year marks a stark departure. Despite other countries such as Australia, Ukraine, South Africa, and Brazil announcing their invitations, India remains conspicuously absent. The host, Canada, has been evasive on this issue, neither confirming nor denying India's exclusion. This ambiguity is more damaging than a straightforward denial or confirmation, as it keeps the topic in the news cycle. Similarly, Indian officials have been equally evasive, unable to provide a definitive response. Admitting the lack of an invitation would significantly undermine India's domestic prestige, while lying is unsustainable in today's transparent world.

   

   
   
2. International Reception of Victory Claims: Following the May 7th air clash, India dispatched multiple delegations abroad to promote its victory. However, these efforts were met with cold receptions. Notably, Japan allocated a mere 15 minutes for meetings, handshakes, photos, and talks with Indian representatives. But the most critical reaction comes from the United States.

   

   
   
3. US Visit of Victory Delegations: Recently, both India and Pakistan sent victory delegations to the US. In the past, India enjoyed warm receptions, including state banquets and joint congressional meetings for Indian officials. However, this time, Indians complained of a cold shoulder from Americans. In contrast, Pakistan's delegation encountered more enthusiastic responses.

Why revisit India's situation? After the May 7th air clash, many still harbored illusions about India's potential, citing its 1.4 billion population and status as the largest South Asian nation. They believed India could easily overcome this minor setback and continue its bright industrialization prospects. But is this true?

Let's look back 160 years. The Anglo-French forces captured Beijing and burned the Old Summer Palace. Typically, they would occupy Chinese territory. However, after signing the Treaty of Beijing, they swiftly withdrew their troops and returned Beijing to the Qing Dynasty. Why?

The Westernization Faction gradually gained influence and sent friendly signals to Britain.

The cannons made during the Self-Strengthening Movement in the Qing Dynasty

The British employed a typical divide-and-rule strategy: on one hand, they fully supported Japan's industrialization through the Meiji Restoration; on the other, they provided limited assistance to the Qing Dynasty, such as military training, customs management, and technology transfer. But their support for the Qing was mostly in civilian sectors like silk and textile factories, with some military technology and even the sale of large warships.

At that time, two factions in Britain were locked in a struggle. One believed that supporting China would benefit Britain, especially in countering Russia. The other argued that a powerful China would threaten British interests, so they backed Japan instead. Unable to reach a consensus, the British hedged their bets but primarily supported Japan.

By the 1870s and 1880s, some British individuals began to take notice of the Qing Dynasty's rising momentum through the westernization movement. The British probed the possibility of a military alliance with the Qing against Russia. Li Hongzhang held several talks with the British, but they failed to reach an agreement due to Britain's low offer and the Qing's high demands.

Meanwhile, the pro-Japanese faction in Britain urged Japan to take action against the Qing. Other countries like the US, Germany, and France, concerned about Britain's growing influence in China, also encouraged Japan. Russia, aware of the significant impact a British-Qing alliance would have on its Far East interests, likewise prompted Japan to act.

Despite believing Japan was unlikely to win, these nations hoped to weaken the Qing and curb British influence in the short term. However, the outcome surprised everyone. The Qing Dynasty's internal corruption and incompetent military were fully exposed during the First Sino-Japanese War, leading to a complete shift in British public opinion.

The British government followed suit, and The Times declared that China was a disorganized entity.

The direct consequence was the Qing Dynasty's signing of the Treaty of Shimonoseki with Japan. But the indirect consequences were even more severe. Unlike previous wars where China had both victories and defeats, the First Sino-Japanese War marked the end of China's millennia-old dominance in East Asia. Japan emerged as the new power, and China's international status plummeted. Countries began to exploit China, imposing harsh conditions that disrupted China's path to industrialization.

Similarly, after the May 7th air clash between India and Pakistan, India faces a comparable situation. Previously, India held strategic value for the West as a counterbalance to Russia. However, the air clash proved India lacked this value, even being humiliated by a smaller neighbor.

Without strategic significance, India becomes a peripheral player in South Asia, potentially facing exploitation by other nations.

In the past, India could navigate international relations to its benefit. But the May 7th defeat has left India with diminished international standing and national confidence, from which it may take decades to recover. India's recent dispatch of delegations to promote its victory is an attempt to regain its strategic value, especially in the eyes of the US. However, this effort is futile, just as China's attempts after the First Sino-Japanese War failed to restore its strategic relevance. This defeat has shattered India's industrialization prospects, marking a catastrophic blow from which it is difficult to recover. History, indeed, can be remarkably unforgiving.