China is playing Go. India needs to learn the game

As Beijing surrounds Delhi, India must expand the board, have a long-term horizon, and consolidate internally

Chinese strategist Sun Tzu’s most famousaphorismgoessomethinglike this. Hesaid, “If youknowneitherthe enemynoryourself, youwillsuccumb in every battle. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will alsosufferadefeat. If youknowtheenemyand knowyourself, youneednotfeartheresult of a hundred battles”

Strategists learn about adversaries by observingtheiractionsandstatements, interpreting their behaviour, and studying their leaders. But the more astute understand the enemies’ mindset by studying their culture.

Leadersandtacticsmaychange, butstrategies and doctrines are embedded in the culture and mindset of a nation and are, therefore, far better predictors of their actions. Bothchinaandindiahavearichcultureand severaltexts that explainrespectivemindsets but an easier way to explain the difference is to studythestrategygamesofthetwonations.

Chess originated in India. The game is playedbytwoplayersonaboardof64squares with16whiteandblackpieceseach. Theopponents start the game with all their pieces arraigned against eachotherandeachplayer movesalternatively. Thepieceshavepowers in hierarchical order with the queen being most powerful. All pieces change their positions continuously during the game.

As those familiar with chess know, it is a game of manoeuvre that has one centre of gravity — the king; andtheobjectiveis to capture or “kill” the opponent’s king. Theloss of rest of the pieces or their positions at the end of the game is immaterial.

The Chinese strategy game, however, is “igo”— commonlyknownas“go”. It is played on a much larger board that has 19x19 sides resulting in 361 points compared to the 64 squares in Chess. In Go, the stones are positioned onthe“intersections” of the squaresto deny “liberty” to the opponent’s stones. Go also haswhiteandblackpieces called stones, but that is where the similarity with chess ends. Theobjective of Goisnottocaptureany single piece; instead, it is to surroundalarger total areaoftheboardwithone’sstonesbefore the opponent. As the game progresses, the players position stones on the board to map outformationsandpotentialterritories. Contests between opposing formations result in the expansion, reduction, or capture andloss of stones. The winner is decided by counting eachplayer’ssurroundedterritoryalongwith captured stones.

China has been playing Go, not chess with India. It hasbeenplayingthegameonamultidimensional canvas much larger than the Indian landmass and across several spectrums, ranging from the military to the economic “intersections” blocking India’s “liberty” or manoeuvrability over a long period. It has inveigled every neighbour of India by coaxing, cajoling, or enticing them into its camp. It hasinfiltrated into India’s economic, infrastructure, health care, communication andtechnologicalvaluechain soinextricably that, contraryto silly calls for boycotting Chinesegoods, India cannotmeaningfullydisengage its dependence on China.

Whilethereisnodoubtingthevalourofour army, the cost of militarily confronting an adversary whose economy is over five times as large as ours and whose defence budget is four times ours would be horrendous in human and economic terms for decades to come. This is particularly so because China has turned India’s northern and western neighbours into its surrogate pincers tying down a large part of our military assets and strategic mindshare. If Indiadoesconsiderthe military option, it will have to factor in China’s overwhelming superiority in the Ladakhregionspecifically, andinelectronic warfare, cyberwar, drones, missiles and the nuclear arsenal of the People’s Liberation Army generally.

The word “igo” in Mandarin literally meanstoencircle, andthatischina’sstrategy with a combination of the “String of Pearls” (whichrefers to the sea line communications fromchinatothehornofafricathroughstrategic choke points and maritime centres in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Maldives and Somalia) along India’s coastline and the Belt and Road initiative in the North. Nepal, Bhutan and now Ladakh are additional “stones” being placed to constrict India’s manoeuvrability from every direction.

Instead of treating these episodes as singular events, India mustjointhedotstoappreciate the Chinese gameplananddesignacounter-strategy along three thrust lines.

First, an encirclement cannot be broken only frominside. Instead, India mustexpand the ‘board” by cooperating with countries suchasjapan, Australia, Taiwan, Malaysia, South Korea, Singapore and Vietnamwhich are increasingly threatened by China’s hegemonisticmoves. Simultaneously, it must build pressure fromwithinthe encirclement by rapprochement with immediate neighbours such as Nepal, Bhutan and Sri Lanka. This requires us to think like agoplayerand appreciate that unlike chess, the stones in Go don’t have relative power. India has far greater historical synergies witheveryoneof our neighbours including Pakistan, than China does. Eachstone, or in this case, country, is important, regardless of its physical or economicsize. Weneedtovaluethemasequal partners in the struggle against Chinese hegemony. Second, India must recast its nationalsecuritystrategyhorizonstodecades instead of election cycles. If a government’s image is interlocked with tactical timelines, then, by definition, strategy will suffer because tactical and strategic goals are usually at cross purposes. Divorcing national security from politics will enable long-term indigenouscapacity-buildingandstrengthening external alliances.

Last, and most important, India needs to consolidate its internal critical mass. The country is facing multiple challenges on several fronts, mostseriouslytheeconomy. Political power, asmaosaid, maygrowfromabarrel of agun, butnationalpoweremanatesfrom astrongandvibranteconomy, which, in turn, requiresinternalpeace, cooperation, andharmonytoinspirecustomerandinvestorconfidence. Unless those conditions are achieved, no country can aspire to be a regional power or thwart attacks on its sovereignty.