A delegation of the Communist Party of China (CPC) met senior functionaries of India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on Monday, followed by a courtesy visit to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) in New Delhi on Tuesday. The meetings, intended to foster dialogue between Indian political and social organisations and the CPC, have sparked a political row, with the Congress party questioning the timing, intent, and transparency of the interactions.

The CPC delegation, led by Sun Haiyan, vice-minister of the International Department of the Communist Party of China (IDCPC), included the Chinese Ambassador to India, Xu Feihong. According to senior RSS functionaries, the delegation had reached out to the Sangh expressing a desire to understand its functioning. Dattatreya Hosabale, the general secretary of the RSS, hosted the delegation. “The Sangh has always been open to meeting people from all ideologies and faiths,” a functionary said, describing the interaction as a courtesy call. Details of the discussion were not disclosed.

This was not the first instance of CPC engagement with the Sangh. In 2014, after the BJP assumed power at the Centre, a delegation from the Chinese Embassy had made a similar courtesy visit to RSS leaders. Senior BJP officials maintained that the recent meetings were part of standard diplomatic interactions and aimed at enhancing dialogue between the two parties, particularly following Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s discussions with Chinese President Xi Jinping during the BRICS summit in Kazan last year.

Arun Singh, BJP national general secretary, who met the delegation alongside Vijay Chauthaiwale, head of the party’s foreign affairs cell, tweeted that discussions were held “to enhance communication and interaction between the BJP and the CPC.” Party functionaries emphasised that these were routine meetings, intended to maintain open lines of dialogue with China amid ongoing diplomatic and trade engagements.

Congress Questions Timing and Intent

Despite BJP and RSS assertions, the Congress party has raised sharp objections. Party leader Pawan Khera described the meetings as an example of the ruling party’s “hypocrisy, duplicity, fraudulence, and deceit.” Khera noted that while political parties often interact with international counterparts, the BJP had previously criticised the Congress for engaging with the CPC, suggesting that India’s national security was being compromised. “The BJP has now engaged in exactly the same interactions it once criticised,” he said.

Khera also raised concerns over the timing of the meetings, pointing out that within hours of the closed-door discussions at BJP headquarters, China reportedly laid claim to the Shaksgam Valley in Jammu and Kashmir. He alleged that the BJP’s engagement with the CPC, alongside reports of Chinese construction in disputed territories, raises questions about India’s strategic interests.

The Congress leader drew attention to India-China border tensions, particularly the Galwan Valley clash of June 2020, in which 20 Indian soldiers were killed. He criticised the government’s response, asserting that India’s military and diplomatic posture has remained ineffective in curbing Chinese incursions and infrastructure developments along the Line of Actual Control (LAC). “China has continued to alter maps, rename locations, and build military infrastructure in disputed areas,” Khera said.

He also highlighted regional security concerns, citing reports that China has provided support to Pakistan in certain operations, including Operation Sindoor, and questioned the Indian government’s handling of Chinese economic interests. Khera argued that while the BJP has repeatedly urged the public to boycott Chinese goods, it has simultaneously allowed Chinese companies to operate in sensitive sectors, lifted bans, and even reinstated previously blacklisted firms.

Congress Criticises RSS Engagement

The Congress also questioned the involvement of non-state actors, specifically the RSS, in discussions with foreign delegations. Khera asserted that non-governmental organisations and political affiliates should not influence state policy, cautioning against the potential for behind-the-scenes interference in matters of national security and diplomacy. “The RSS works behind the shadows,” he remarked, implying that such meetings could have indirect implications on India’s official foreign policy.

BJP and RSS Response

BJP and RSS functionaries have sought to downplay the criticism, emphasising that India-China engagement occurs at multiple levels and that courtesy calls and dialogue are part of normal diplomatic practice. “There is no secrecy; there is no compromise of national interest,” a senior BJP official said, noting that political organisations often host foreign delegations to foster understanding, share ideological perspectives, and discuss avenues for cooperation in trade, culture, and international relations.

The RSS clarified that the meeting was purely educational in nature, with the CPC delegation seeking insights into the Sangh’s organisational functioning and socio-political philosophy. No formal agreements or policy decisions were made during the visit, according to Sangh sources.

Historical Context and Implications

India’s political parties have a long history of engaging with foreign delegations to discuss mutual concerns and foster dialogue. However, interactions with the CPC are particularly sensitive given the ongoing territorial disputes, historical border conflicts, and strategic rivalries. While the BJP has historically criticised the Congress for engaging with China, it now faces scrutiny for following a similar approach, leading to accusations of double standards and political opportunism.

As of now, both the BJP and RSS maintain that the engagements with the CPC are standard diplomatic courtesy and not intended to influence India’s official stance on security, border disputes, or trade policy. Congress, meanwhile, has demanded greater transparency and accountability regarding the meetings, including clarification on what was discussed and whether India’s strategic interests were considered.

The developments have sparked a wider debate on political engagement with China, the role of non-state actors in diplomacy, and the need for clear guidelines on such interactions. Observers note that while informal exchanges between parties are common, the sensitivity of India-China relations requires careful management to avoid perceptions of compromise or impropriety.