Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to China for the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit in Tianjin has become one of the most closely watched diplomatic events of the year. It is not simply the return of an Indian Prime Minister to Chinese soil after more than seven years, but a deliberate attempt by New Delhi to signal that engagement with Beijing remains central to India’s foreign policy, despite years of mistrust and border standoffs. For China too, the opportunity to host Mr. Modi at a time of slowing economic growth and shifting global alignments carries weight. The bilateral meeting with President Xi Jinping, therefore, is being read as more than just a summit sideline; it is a cautious reset in one of the world’s most complex relationships.
The images of Mr. Modi and Mr. Xi greeting each other in Tianjin were heavy with symbolism. Xi chose a vivid metaphor, describing India as the elephant and China as the dragon, insisting it was the “right choice” for both to walk together in harmony rather than be consumed by rivalry. Mr. Modi, echoing India’s longstanding emphasis on principles, spoke of mutual respect, sensitivity, and stability as the pillars upon which ties must rest. Such statements, while diplomatic in tone, matter deeply in setting the mood after years of hostility. Since the Galwan Valley clashes of 2020, which left soldiers dead on both sides and public opinion deeply scarred, relations have drifted into distrust. Dialogue at the top political level has been scarce, and the border has remained tense with both armies maintaining forward deployments. Against this backdrop, even the resumption of high-level conversation is itself a diplomatic achievement.
The context of the visit makes it especially significant. The SCO platform has often forced India and China to work in the same space, but meetings were carefully avoided in the recent past. For Mr. Modi to attend the summit in Tianjin, and more importantly to sit down with Xi for an extended dialogue, is a conscious attempt to bring relations back into a channel of engagement. Analysts note that while such summits rarely produce instant breakthroughs, they keep alive the idea that neither side wants permanent hostility. In international politics, where perceptions often harden into policy, this is important.
At the heart of India’s concerns lies the Line of Actual Control. The Prime Minister underscored once again that tranquillity on the border is essential for the normalisation of ties. The past few years have demonstrated that even minor flare-ups can escalate dangerously in an environment of mistrust. The announcement of a new hotline between senior commanders and a revival of border personnel meetings are small but useful steps in ensuring that communication prevents miscalculation. These measures are unlikely to satisfy those who demand immediate disengagement from friction points in Eastern Ladakh, but they at least demonstrate that both sides recognise the dangers of letting matters spiral. The Indian side has made it clear that until progress is visible on the boundary, broader relations cannot return to business as usual. Yet New Delhi also understands that maintaining frozen ties with a neighbour as significant as China serves no one’s interest. The balancing act, therefore, is to hold firm on territorial concerns while keeping other doors open.
Economic discussions formed the second pillar of the visit. Bilateral trade has crossed $100 billion, making China India’s largest trading partner. But the imbalance is glaring: India’s trade deficit with China stands above $70 billion, with imports in critical areas such as electronics, machinery, active pharmaceutical ingredients, and solar modules. Mr. Modi pressed Beijing to address this imbalance, urging greater market access for Indian products, particularly pharmaceuticals, agricultural goods, and IT services. While Chinese officials refrained from promising specific concessions, they signalled a willingness to review regulations that hinder Indian exports. For India, the issue is not simply commercial; dependence on China for vital supply chains raises questions of national security. Diversifying and balancing trade flows is therefore a strategic necessity.
Beyond trade, investment featured in the conversations. Chinese firms have long sought opportunities in India’s infrastructure and technology sectors, but security concerns have curtailed approvals in recent years. The Prime Minister emphasised that while India welcomes investment, it must align with transparency and security safeguards. This careful positioning is aimed at balancing the need for capital inflows with national sensitivities. It also serves as a reminder to Beijing that cooperation cannot come at the cost of sovereignty.
The visit also had a softer side, with announcements on resuming direct flights between Indian and Chinese cities and reviving the Kailash Mansarovar Yatra. These decisions, though seemingly minor, carry strong symbolic weight. Direct flights will reconnect businesses, students, and tourists after years of pandemic-induced suspension. The pilgrimage, cherished by many Indians, reflects civilisational linkages that transcend politics. In an atmosphere where suspicion dominates, such gestures help humanise the relationship and rebuild reservoirs of goodwill. Diplomacy is not only about grand strategies; it is also about sustaining small acts of connection that outlive political disagreements.
The global context lent urgency to the Tianjin engagement. India is navigating new tariff barriers imposed by the United States, even as it seeks to deepen its economic partnership with the West. China, meanwhile, faces its own economic slowdown and strained ties with Washington. Both countries therefore share an incentive to explore limited cooperation, particularly in global forums. During their meeting, Mr. Modi and Mr. Xi discussed ways to strengthen their roles in BRICS, G20, and the United Nations. Issues such as climate finance, reform of global governance structures, and resilience of supply chains were reportedly on the agenda. The Prime Minister invited President Xi to attend the BRICS summit in India next year, and Xi signalled his willingness to participate. These multilateral spaces offer India and China a chance to cooperate on global challenges even as bilateral disputes remain unresolved.
The shadow of Pakistan, however, looms large over any India–China conversation. Beijing’s all-weather partnership with Islamabad, particularly the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), continues to be a thorn for New Delhi. By engaging Xi directly, Mr. Modi conveyed that India’s concerns cannot be brushed aside. The symbolism here matters: India refuses to let its regional equations be defined solely by the China–Pakistan axis. Instead, it asserts its place as an independent power centre that Beijing must engage with on its own terms. Whether China recalibrates its approach remains uncertain, but India’s message was clear.
Regional security issues also made their way into discussions. The instability in Myanmar, uncertainty in Afghanistan, and turbulence in Central Asia pose shared challenges. Both India and China, as nuclear powers with global ambitions, bear responsibility for stability in their neighbourhoods. The SCO itself has become a platform where these concerns are debated, and the Modi–Xi dialogue signalled an intention to coordinate, if not cooperate, in managing these crises.
Yet scepticism abounds. Critics in India argue that warm words have in the past led nowhere. The Wuhan informal summit in 2018 and the Mamallapuram summit in 2019 had raised hopes of rapprochement, only to be followed by the Galwan clash. Trust once broken is hard to rebuild. Without tangible progress on disengagement along the LAC, they argue, any talk of a reset remains hollow. Others caution that engaging China while it continues to consolidate infrastructure near the border risks sending mixed signals. Such criticisms are not misplaced, but they perhaps underestimate the role of diplomacy in keeping conflict at bay. Even without breakthroughs, maintaining open lines of communication helps prevent miscalculation and signals to the world that both sides are acting responsibly.
Ultimately, the significance of the Tianjin visit lies less in immediate outcomes than in its symbolism. It reflected India’s resolve to engage adversaries without compromising on core interests. It demonstrated China’s recognition that alienating India entirely is not sustainable. And it reassured the international community that Asia’s two giants, despite their disputes, are at least willing to talk. For a relationship that has seen more downs than ups in recent years, this willingness itself is progress.
In the longer arc of history, the visit may be remembered not as a turning point but as a cautious step toward restoring dialogue. The fundamental disputes—territorial disagreements, economic asymmetries, strategic rivalry—will remain. But diplomacy rarely delivers miracles. Its function is to keep the possibility of peace alive, to prevent the hardening of conflict into inevitability, and to carve out small spaces of cooperation amidst competition. In this sense, Mr. Modi’s visit to China was an affirmation of diplomacy’s quiet power.
For India, the message was that it will defend its borders, safeguard its economic interests, and strengthen its global partnerships, yet still remain open to dialogue. For China, the meeting underlined that it must engage India as a neighbour whose weight cannot be ignored. For the world, the sight of Modi and Xi shaking hands in Tianjin was a reminder that even in a polarised international order, diplomacy retains its relevance. The reset is cautious, incomplete, and fragile. But in a region where mistrust runs deep, even fragile beginnings are worth preserving.

Email:-------------------------artistmalik46@gmail.com