By denying visa to Dolkun Isa, Modi has shown world China calls the shots

Days after granting it, the Indian government cancelled the visa of Chinese dissident leader and Uyghur activist Dolkun Isa earlier this week. Isa is the chairman of the Germany-based World Uyghur Congress and was due to attend a conference next week in the northern Indian town of Dharamsala being organised by the US-based Initiatives for China.

Uyghurs are an ethnic minority community from China's western Xinjiang region and have a long history of discord with Beijing. They are Muslims and regard themselves as culturally and ethnically close to Central Asian nations. China has been battling Uyghur separatism in Xinjiang since the 1990s and began labelling separatists "terrorists" since 2001 to get global support even as its stringent policies have been fuelling militancy further. Chinese authorities consider Isa as a terrorist and promptly criticised India when the visa was issued.

India's initial decision to grant the visa to Isa was largely viewed as a retaliatory measure against China after Beijing blocked India's bid to get the UN to put Jaish-e-Muhammad chief Masood Azhar on its terrorist list. China decided to put a technical "hold" on Masood Azhar's terror designation, defending their stance by suggesting that more information was needed on the matter. New Delhi's visa to Isa was an unusual and provocative one, the first time New Delhi was taking on China. Even Rebiya Kadeer, chief of the World Uyghur Congress, was not granted a visa by India in 2009.

And so, when India cancelled its e-visa to Isa, the Modi government seemed to have unwittingly signalled that China still calls the shots in this bilateral relationship. The government has been publicly embarrassed, though officially it continues to maintain that Isa's e-visa was revoked because such a visa is only issued for tourism purposes and Isa was coming to India to attend a conference. New Delhi has also suggested that the Interpol's red corner notice was one of the reasons for the cancellation even though Isa has been travelling to other countries such as the US and Japan without much problem.

Isa has expressed his disappointment at the turn of events and has pinned the blame on the doors of China, suggesting that "Chinese pressure" would have been behind India's decision as China "has regularly attempted to block or interfere with my human rights work at the UN in Geneva, in particular". China did protest diplomatically to India and underlined that "Dolkun is a terrorist on red notice of the Interpol and Chinese police". After Isa's case, it has emerged that two more Chinese activists Li Jinghua and Ray Wong were not given visas by New Delhi.

The Modi government is receiving flak from various quarters - not only from its opponents but also from its supporters who have long wanted New Delhi to follow a more muscular approach vis-à-vis China.

Moreover, there are issues pertaining to India's support for democratic forces in its vicinity. For a country that never fails to mention its democratic credentials in its quest for major power status, such pusillanimity on its core values does not inspire much confidence.

It is true that New Delhi-Beijing is a major bilateral relationship that India needs to nurture with due diligence. It needs to worry about economic and trade ties with China as well as China's hands-off approach vis-à-vis separatists in Kashmir and the Northeast.

Yet, there were ways in which the government could have salvaged the situation better once the visa was issued rather than taking an embarrassing U-turn, which has left most baffled owing to the sheer incompetence with which such a serious issue was handled.

This is a consequence of the way in which foreign affairs and national security are being dealt with under the Modi administration. Though foreign policy has largely been a success story for the two-year-old government, there are big personalities at play and the institutions are working in silos without any meaningful coordination.

In this case, the ministry of external affairs was reportedly kept out of the loop as the ministry of home affairs and the national security adviser's office became the ultimate arbiters, resulting in a policy which has lowered India's stock at multiple levels. It once again underscores how vulnerable India remains to Chinese pressures even as it demonstrates New Delhi's inability to execute tough foreign policy decisions.

It also makes it clear that India does not have any real leverage vis-à-vis China at a time when relations between the two sides are becoming increasingly difficult.

This episode will have some serious long-term consequences for India's China policy which under the Modi government was finally becoming more coherent and robust.