China's Offensive Approach in the Indian Ocean Region

Similarly, in the international system nation-states are constantly in a state of insecurity and uncertainty, and cannot perceive the real intentions of other states and subsequently strive towards acquiring and harnessing capabilities as deterrence against any form of threat. Besides, the anarchic nature of the international system only adds more anxiety and scepticism towards the prevailing sense of insecurity that exists among states. In the process of achieving security through acquisition of capabilities to ensure impregnability against any threat, nations create a security dilemma in the international system, as the security of one state leads to insecurity for another. To overcome this sense of insecurity, states strive towards harnessing and maximizing more capabilities than their counterparts to supersede their threat which leads towards an upward vicious unending spiral which can never be halted due to the nature of the concept of security, as no one can ever feel completely secured at all times in a competing environment, hence this spiral of intense security and capability stockpiling, will follow as long as anarchy lasts in the international system. The anarchy in the international system induces states to maximize their power to guarantee their security and it spurs them towards achieving superiority rather than equality, to add to their chances of survivability. The sole objective of every state in the international system is to grow and become a hegemony, since the strong and powerful are less likely to be challenged by the weaker states which allows them to pursue their national interest.

In contrast to offensive realism, defensive realist posture aims to ensure a status quo of power and security, by using a balance of power as a tool to maximize security globally. This branch of thought seeks to preserve the prevailing currency of power through defensive measures. It views the international system as an instrument that enables states to act and operate moderately between one another, to ensure and guarantee the safety and survivability of each unit on the global forum. By following a measured and restrained approach, the defensive realists opine that security dilemma and counterbalancing behaviour can be avoided, since counterbalancing measures are exercised against hegemons.

Scrutinizing China's foreign and military policies and strategies in the Indian Ocean and South China Sea and contrasting it with offensive realism, one can observe the glaring similarities which exist and denote China's true intentions to accumulate absolute power and security. To corroborate its aggressive and belligerent nature in its pursuit of transforming itself into a regional and global hegemony, a few of its military and maritime policies will be examined, concurrently debunking and calling China's bluff of â ˜Peaceful Development and Peaceful Rise'.

Beijing's 2003 planning document clearly signals China's new strategic thought to transform itself into a maritime power centred around economics, to achieve this objective the Chinese leadership advocated four fundamental components of maritime power which include marine resources, the ocean economy, marine environmental protection and maritime rights and interests. Chinese President, Xi Jinping has asserted on several occasions, China’s commitment to explore and exploit the nautical and seabed resources in the high seas. In a 2013 meet at Politburo, on China’s maritime power and strategy, Xi Jinping opined that China must thoroughly perform ocean and polar scientific survey work, perform deep-sea and distant-ocean survey research, expand international cooperation in marine science and technology and make preliminary preparations for exploiting ocean and polar resources.” Similarly, in 2016, Xi Jinping articulated the importance of developing and mastering key technologies to extract and exploit the earthly treasures hidden under the oceans. Ever since, Beijing has employed a concerted effort to undertake its commercial venture to exploit the seabed resources on the high seas. Currently, it enjoys contract rights under the aegis of the International Seabed Authority, to explore seabed resources in three separate zones in Clarion Clipperton Fracture Zone, Southwest Indian Ridge and Western Pacific Ocean. China’s oceanographic research task force comprises of vessels which has the ability to conduct high-resolution bathymetric surveys of high seas, and the capability to identify probable deposits of seabed minerals with advanced technology using shipboard multi-beam echo system and state-of-art UUVs. The information collected by these vessels are used to scape prospective contract rights while also allowing them to view and mark potential zones for economic interest.

Apart from exploring the ocean seabed, the nautical data collection by the Chinese oceanographic task force permits Beijing to study and understand the dynamics of the oceanic battlespace environment in the form of surface and subsurface waves, currents, and tides in different regions. Typical nautical features of a maritime zone enable the Chinese to develop state of art maritime machinery for combat purpose to outperform its adversaries, while also being able to operationally sustain against oceanic elements such as ocean temperature, density, and salinity which affect maritime operations from basic navigation to amphibious operations. Cognisance of battlespace, current and climatic conditions provide edge to any military over its adversaries, as a result China’s oceanographic exploration provides not only an economic landscape of the oceans but also offers its navy the knowledge for undersea warfare. In the pretext of exploring its legitimate maritime zones, Chinese submersibles have been located in various Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) and territorial waters of various countries causing considerable apprehension and scepticism between the concerned states due to the dubious nature and uncertain intention of Beijing. 

China’s ‘Two Ocean’ strategy, has resulted in the expansion of naval capability giving China a maritime footprint in the Indian Ocean Region, to protect its economic and trade initiative of the 'Maritime Silk Route' (MSR). China's recent focus on developing its maritime force originates from the fact that, it has shifted focus from a land-centric strategy to an ocean-centric strategy, and of having permanent naval presence in the Indian Ocean. This naval posture has increased the maritime operations in the eastern and western parts of the Indian Ocean at an unprecedented scale in 2017, causing tremendous apprehension to the Indian security establishment. In February 2017, the eastern part of the Indian Ocean, witnessed two Chinese cruise missile destroyers Haikou and Changsha conducting live-fire and anti-piracy and combat drills to test combat readiness of their navy. In August 2017, a Chinese naval formation was spotted, consisting of a destroyer Changchun, guided-missile frigate Jingzhou and a supply vessel Chaohu, that conducted a live-fire drill in the western part of the Indian Ocean. The reason stated by the Chinese officials for this naval exercise was to carry out strikes against 'enemy' warships, indirectly hinting at the Indian Navy. The following day the South China Morning Post (August 26), hinted the 'drill was a warning shot to India' confirming China’s belligerent behaviour and expansionist attitude.

In the recently concluded Raisina Dialogue 2020, New Delhi, the Indian Navy Admiral admitted that “China’s Belt and Road Initiative and the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor impinge on our sovereignty.” He further added that the Indian Navy is closely monitoring all the developments in the Indian Ocean Region and has operationalised “mission-based” deployments to maintain a vigil on the maritime activities and to thwart Chinese Navy’s acts of infringement of India’s maritime space. He cited that on one such occasion the Indian Navy drove away a Chinese naval ship from the Indian EEZ in the Andaman Sea. He concluded by saying “Before 2008, they weren’t really very obvious in the Indian Ocean region but now you find that at given time, 7 to 8 PLA warships in that area.” As the PLA Navy is quickly expanding geographically, it has forced Beijing to expedite its mastery over the “ocean battlespace environment” in the new domains of the maritime.

China’s use of commercial and military naval bases and interlinked ports at various crucial nodes across the Indian Ocean Region around India’s periphery has led to the operationalisation of the ‘String of Pearls’ strategy which is aimed to girdle and confine India’s influence within the subcontinent and South Asia. Its existing territorial disputes and sporadic attempts of incursions in the northern theatre of mainland India, its naval build-up in the Indian Ocean and its ‘String of Pearls’ initiative to restrict India’s influence has reasserted China’s aggressive and hegemonic nature, in contrast to its false claim of a ‘Peaceful Rise’. China’s aggressive expansionist nature has been observed in the South China Sea as well, when it flexed its muscles by militarily occupying the Paracel Islands, where it instituted a civilian governor in the garrison city of Sansha, and hoisted its own flag and thereby legally claiming sovereignty over the islands. And as a result, the Chinese Navy was able to provide requisite protection around these Islands increasing its sphere of influence. This is a classic case of acquiring actual jurisdiction over one's own governed territory. In addition to this strategy, China has also constructed artificial islands in the South China Sea and has resorted to land reclamation acts by spinning historical narratives to expand and own territorial and maritime sovereignty, while ensuring a robust sphere of influence in the region. This is one of the many examples of China’s expansionist and parochial behaviour in the region which has led to an unstable and volatile environment, especially in the East China Sea and the South China Sea where countries are grappling with China’s hegemonic bullying nature and thus resorting to find external support from stronger countries like India and U.S while forming strategic partnerships with the same and forming military alliances to counterbalance the Dragon.

(Arjun is the Phd scholar at Jindal School of International Affairs(JSIA), O P Jindal University, Sonepat, India. He has been doing research on India's defence strategy and outlook towards Indian Ocean).