It's been a busy season for Sino-Indian war-mongering, as I noted here, but earlier this week, the news cycle spun completely out of orbit, demonstrating just how much of a "trust deficit" exists between the two countries, how inflamed passions can get, and just how easily the media can get sucked into a whirlpool of sensational headlines...

It all started with the publication of a Chinese-language "essay" (here; English translation and analysis by D.S. Rajan of the Chennai Centre for China Studies here).Mr Rajan is an acknowledged "old China hand" who speaks fluent Chinese, and I have personally profited from my many interactions with him, during which he generously shared his informed and nuanced perspective born of years of 'China-watching'.

Yet, when I came across this particular "essay" (which argues provocatively how China can 'balkanise' India), I had a sneaking sense of déjà vue, and I held back from reporting on it until I could verify its authenticity, and even shared my scepticism in internal editorial discussions. But when the article whipped up a media storm in India and abroad and triggered hysterical reactions from lay persons (see readers' comments here and here, but be warned of profanity!) and when even the government stepped in to respond to it, the chatter proved impossible to ignore.

I wish I'd been a little more persuasive. For it now turns out that the "essay" was not authored by a high-ranking strategic analyst at an official Chinese government thinktank (as had been suspected); it was in fact a regurgitation of the random rants of one hawkish lay individual that has been circulating in the echo chamber of the Chinese Internet for years. Mildly different versions - in Chinese - of the same article can be accessed here (in 2005; it's the third comment on the page), here (in 2006) and here (in 2007).

What should one make of all this? As I noted in my previous post, the state-owned Chinese media continues to maintain an uncharacteristically bellicose tone in its articles and editorials on India. To the extent that such ideas are being articulated in the official media, they reflect a disconcerting aspect of the political mindset in Beijing (or at any rate among one faction of policymakers and 'thought leaders').

But, equally important, what does it say of us if the random ravings of a right-wing nut, regurgitated ad nauseum, will send us into paroxysms of rage and blustery talk of war? The Chinese Internet is a curious beast: by its very nature, fenqing ('angry youth') are overrepresented in that space, and sometimes portals competing for eyeballs will go for maximum, even to the extent of 'manufacturing news' (as in this hoax report with graphic pictures of "cannibalism" being practised in southern China). And hyperactive as they are, the Chinese censors are not always ahead of the game.

Loose talk of war - on both sides of the McMahon Line (which, by the way, China doesn't recognise!) - is a self-fulfilling prophesy. As psychologist Gordon Allport argues in The Role of Expectancy,

"While most peo­ple deplore war, they nonetheless expect it to continue. And what people expect determines their behavior.

"Expectations are themselves a complex matter, only par­tially conscious and only partially rational. To change warlike expectations to peaceful expectations requires first of all a careful analysis of the blend of personal and social factors that determine the anticipations of people in the world today".

The Preamble to UNESCO's Constitution observes: "Since wars begin in the minds of men... it is in the minds of men that the defences of peace must be constructed." That objective is not easily achieved, for as Bernard Shaw said, "Peace is ... infinitely more arduous (than war)."

But perhaps filtering out ill-informed right-wing rants - on both sides of the border - would be a starting point.

***

On a related note, read Admiral Sureesh Anand's thoughts on conflict - and cooperation - with China.

***

P.S. The always perceptive Acorn has a wrap-up with some interesting links.