Chairman of the Indian Overseas Congress, Sam Pitroda, on Monday stated that the India-China conflict is often exaggerated, emphasizing the need for a shift from confrontation to collaboration.
Speaking on the issue, Pitroda remarked, “I don’t understand the threat from China. I think this issue is often blown out of proportion because the US has a tendency to define an enemy.” He argued that India’s approach towards China has been “confrontational from the very beginning,” which, in his view, fosters animosity and strengthens nationalist sentiments domestically.
He urged a change in perspective, stating, “We need to change this mindset and stop assuming that China is the enemy from day one. It’s unfair, not just to China, but to everyone.”
His remarks come amid ongoing tensions between India and China over border disputes, as well as discussions on global security concerns involving major world powers.
Meanwhile, during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent visit to the United States, former U.S. President Donald Trump addressed India-China tensions and other global conflicts.
Speaking at a joint press conference with PM Modi, Trump acknowledged the intensity of India-China border skirmishes and expressed willingness to mediate if needed. “I look at India, I do see the skirmishes on the border, which are quite vicious, and I guess they continue to go on. If I could be of help, I’d love to help, because that should be stopped,” Trump said.
Trump also stressed the role of China in resolving the Russia-Ukraine conflict, stating, “I don’t want to be naive, but as leaders go, I think we were very close. And I think that China is a very important player in the world. I think they can help us get this war over with Ukraine and Russia.”
His remarks highlighted the significance of diplomatic efforts among major global powers in addressing ongoing international conflicts.
The India-China border dispute has remained a critical geopolitical issue, with both nations engaging in several rounds of diplomatic and military discussions. Pitroda’s comments, however, suggest an alternative approach that prioritizes dialogue and mutual understanding over conflict and confrontation.
