India's Sun Tsu is the sage Chanakya who wrote the norms of warfare abd diplomacy termed Chanakyaniti.
Per the rules of Chanakyaniti India is trying to have "one way " alliances where the more powerful partner in the alliance is duped into providing support to the junior partner but gets nothing in return. In the past India has successfully followed the Chanakyaniti principle when it signed the Treaty of Friendship and Security with the Soviet Union. In the short run India benefited enormously because the Soviet Union armed India with the state of the art weapons used by its own armed forces , from Mig 25 Foxbats to Foxtrot class submarines.
The Soviet Union directly intervened as India's partner in the 1971 Pakistan Civil War warding off US pressure on India. The Soviet Union sent guided missile cruisers and nuclear submarines to defend India from a punishing strike by a US Navy task force ( 7th Fleet). Soviet personnel manned Tu-16 "Moss" AWACS ensured India maintained air superiority over Pakistan and 30 Soviet armored divisions on the Chinese border as a "cocked fist" ensured China would not come to Pakistan's aid.
India easily won the war on the Eastern front, though Pakistan managed to hold on to its portion of Kashmir in a bloody stalemate in the West.
If the Soviets thought the "mutual" defense treaty was of any benefit to them, they were sadly mistaken. Soviet KGB Major General Kim Philby ( a defector from the British MI-5), and an expert on South Asia had warned the defense staff before the Afghan operations in 1980 that Pakistan must be overrun simultaneously along with Afghanistan if there is to be any chance of success. Kim Philby suggested an invasion of Pakistan from the east by India, even as the Soviet Union would roll into Pakistan's western region across Afghanistan. The Western powers would no longer have a base to manage an anti-Soviet resistance , and India would realize its long cherished dream of taking Pakistan and Kashmir. The Soviet Union would have access to the Arabian Sea and Persian Gulf. China would be contained forever. If the operation was conducted swiftly it would all be over in three weeks like the formation of Bangladesh. It was a good plan with one flaw.
India chickened out and let down the Soviet Union. As long as Pakistan existed controlling Afghanistan was impossible ( a fact that the Americans found out years later).
Kim Philby had suggested postponing the Afghan operations until sufficient forces could be brought to bear for the Soviet Union to take Pakistan alone. This would need significant manpower and the Soviet Union needed Warsaw Pact or Cuban troops. Against Kim Philby's advice the Afghan invasion was launched, and the rest is history.
The Soviet Union collapsed and in another play of Chanakyaniti India switched sides to court the USA though even as late as 1991 when the Soviet Union had all but collapsed India backed the Saddam Husain regime in Iraq during operation Desert
Storm.
Post 9/11 India refused to fight on behalf of the USA both in Afghanistan and Iraq but still got huge favors in trade and arms supplies.
At this time India expects the USA to help it exactly the way the Soviet Union did for three decades. India's only adversary was a weakened and fractured Pakistan.
The difference here is that the stakes are much higher. China is no Pakistan and the USA is no Soviet Union.
Let's see how the Chanakyaniti works this time.
If India envisions another multi-decades long cold war where India can play one side against another, I think they are going down the wrong path. This will not play out like another Soviet/U.S.
1. Economy, China is, after 2020, 70% of the U.S. economy by Currency Exchange. The devaluation of the dollar alone for the next decade, will bring that to parity. Strip away the inflated financial sector and the health sector, which does not help in great power competition, China is already same size as the U.S. PPP, China is 25% larger than the U.S., the true economy is somewhere in between. In the next decade, they can grow their economy at 5-6% while the U.S. will recover to 2019 level maybe in 2023. The factors for China's growth are all inside China, things like robotic density per 10000 population, AI, etc. The U.S. simply don't have a way to intervene to slow their growth. Even the trade war, the centerpiece for Trump, has turned out to be a failure. As long as raw materials keep flowing in, they will be unstoppable. Many of their exports have become irreplaceable at any price. Take the common disposable lighter, they have something like 80% of the market. There is simply no place else one can buy in that quantity even if you are willing to pay 10x the price.
2. Military, both the U.S. @ 4-5% and China @2%, are not spending too much, but the scary thing is how much China got for the much smaller budget compared to the U.S. Their launched military ship tonnage far exceeds the U.S. Even today, they will match the U.S. in ship production once they master nuclear carriers and better subs. They are doing so with alarming speed. In another decade, when they exceed the U.S. economy in currency exchange, China can initiate an arms race that the U.S. will fail to match. Imagine if China were to build 20 CSG. Would the U.S. have the capacity to even build the same if we have the money? Many ships in our fleet are old and direly need replacement. We don't have a civilian ship building industry to create more ship docks.
3. Geo-political. China is not the Soviet Union. Instead of fighting heads on when your power is weaker, they are very restrained in using their power. They are singularly focused on growing their economy and climbing the technological ladder. They try to build relationships with the world, With Europe, with third world countries, with all countries in Middle East, including Israel. Quasi alliance with Russia, Pakistan, North Korea and Iran. There is no firm alliance with any country (except maybe North Korea), so no obligation to fight endless wars. Good luck trying to form an alliance to block their rise. To do so, we will have to go against the self interest of all the countries that deal with them. If the U.S. has a lot of excess money to throw around, many that was an option, but we are broke. Many might scoff at them for not having any alliances. For them to rise, they just need most of the world not to turn against them, a very low and achievable foreign policy goal.
On our side of the Pacific, we will be printing money till the cows come home. Eventually, we will lose our reserved currency status. As Ray Dalio said, this happened a few times in history before, and it signal the end of the empire. Even knowing this, we are powerless to stop our trajectory, as money printing is the most politically expedient thing to do. I think this will happen in the next decade, maybe two tops. Our nation has turned divisive, black against white, rich against poor, left against right. Our colleges are still the best, but turning discoveries into products requires engineering and manufacturing capability that only exists on the other side of the Pacific. As they invest in their colleges, they will increasingly be competitive to ours. What is worse, all our publications, in English is available to China. The reverse is not true, as there are simply not enough technical people that can read Chinese. This one side transparency will, over the longer term, have consequences.
If I were a betting man, I would say in even two decades, the two super powers will begin to evolve into one true super power and the U.S. will begin to focus more inward the become more of a regional power. India, will be on the wrong side of history. The tragedy is, this is all self inflicted. There was no need to thumb their chest at China at the border like they did. China was not interested in border expansion. India could manage their political process without making an enemy out of China, but they did and this is very unfortunate for India in the longer run.
)
