Answer

Introduction

India and China mark 75 years of diplomatic relations in 2025, with recent developments like  resumption of Kailash Manasarovar Yatra. Historically, ties were shaped not by territorial disputes but by intellectual exchange, epitomised by Nalanda, where monks like Xuanzang and Faxian fostered dialogue and civilisational connect.

Body

Recent Signs of Diplomatic Thaw between India and China

• High-level Defence Dialogue: Indian  Defence Minister’s meeting with Chinese Admiral Admiral at the SCO signalled willingness to keep communication channels open.
  Eg: In January 2025, the leaders met on the sidelines of the SCO Defence Ministers’ meeting, reflecting a rare platform for direct conversation amid border frictions.
• Resumption of Cultural-Religious Ties: Restarting the Kailash Manasarovar Yatra reflects soft-diplomacy and people-to-people bonding.
• Chinese Foreign Minister’s Visit: Wang Yi’s two-day India visit indicates intent to rebuild trust through sustained dialogue.
  Eg: August 2025 trip came after a long diplomatic freeze, showcasing China’s willingness to re-engage with India at the highest diplomatic level.
• Symbolic Commemoration: 75 years of diplomatic engagement highlights historic ties and an opportunity for reset.
  Eg: Celebrations in 2025 underscored civilisational linkages and reminded both nations of their long history of cooperation beyond present disputes.
• Shift in Tone despite Tensions: Diplomatic gestures show readiness to move beyond hostility, especially on borders.
  Eg: Even with unresolved LAC issues, both sides have adopted a less confrontational posture in official meetings, indicating scope for coexistence.
• Potential for Broader Cooperation: Steps provide scope for collaboration in trade, culture, and academics.
  Eg: These signals of warmth have been interpreted as the first step towards reactivating frozen academic exchanges and restoring stalled trade mechanisms.
• Resumption of cultural-religious exchanges: Reinstatement of suspended people-to-people ties indicates calibrated confidence-building measures.
  Eg: Kailash Manasarovar Yatra resumed in 2025 after a four-year hiatus.

Nalanda Tradition as a Framework for Reimagining India–China Relations

• Historical precedent of intellectual diplomacy: Nalanda was a hub of cross-cultural scholarship where monks and scholars exchanged knowledge beyond political boundaries.
• Mutual Learning for Development: Development need not be zero-sum; Nalanda embodies mutual enrichment.
  Eg: India can learn from China’s grassroots infrastructure, while China can study India’s digital governance.
• People-to-People Engagement: Shrinking cultural exchanges erode trust; Nalanda shows shared experiences build confidence.
  Eg: Xuanzang studied at Nalanda under Silabhadra in the 7th century and carried Buddhist teachings to China.
• Shared Civilisational Ethos: Rising nationalism overshadows heritage; Nalanda and Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam highlight shared values.
  Eg: Nalanda’s motto of “Aa no bhadra kratavo yantu viśvata”, “Let noble thoughts come from all directions,” embodies this ethos.
• Adaptive Policy Thinking: Weak research capacity limits policy; Nalanda’s resilience inspires long-term academic investments.
  Eg: Expanding China-focused think tanks and language training in India.
• Model for soft power and cultural diplomacy: Reimagining Nalanda fosters India’s image as a beacon of knowledge and China’s interest in constructive engagement.
• Shift from zero-sum to cooperative paradigm: The Nalanda model advocates coexistence of differences while nurturing zones of agreement.
  Eg: Combining firm border stance with cultural, academic, and trade-level dialogues.

Concerns hindering Nalanda Tradition

• Historical vs. Contemporary Realities: Nalanda’s ideals of open exchange cannot by themselves address today’s hard border disputes and security concerns.
• Power Asymmetry: China’s larger economic and military clout creates an imbalance that intellectual diplomacy alone cannot bridge.
• Political Will: Deep mistrust and rigid bureaucratic controls restrict meaningful academic or cultural engagement.
• Geopolitical Pressures: Global rivalries and alliance politics narrow the scope for genuine bilateral cooperation.
• Risk of Tokenism: Overemphasis on cultural symbolism may dilute focus on core political, trade, and security issues.

Conclusion

India–China relations, at 75 years, stand at a crossroads where history offers a pathway forward. The Nalanda tradition rooted in dialogue, curiosity, and mutual learning provides a resilient framework to transcend transient disputes and nurture a partnership of co-existence. By investing in academic, cultural, and policy-level exchanges while firmly safeguarding national interests, both nations can build a “dialogue without suspicion, engagement without subservience” model suited to the 21st century.

DOWNLOAD PDF