As two of the oldest civilizations in the world as well as neighbors, India and China have a strange love-hate relationship which is at times hard to define. One of the primary issues is the massive trust deficit and lack of understanding between the two nations.

This lack of trust inhibits truly friendly relations because it makes both sides see each other through the prism of suspicion. As far as the "Belt and Road" initiative goes, apart from the fact that the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor goes through disputed territory that is claimed by both India and Pakistan, there is some concern in India over the lack of consultation on the issue, unlike the detailed discussions which led to the formation of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) spearheaded by China. 

This in turn has led many in Delhi to believe that the "Belt and Road" initiative is a unilateral Chinese plan aimed at serving only Beijing's interests. While it is no one's case that any nation planning such a massive initiative should do so for altruistic reasons, there is a need to ensure that all the nations along the route feel that they too will benefit in some form from the project.

At the inaugural Raisina Dialogue held in New Delhi in early March, Indian Foreign Secretary Subrahmanyam Jaishankar made a somewhat oblique reference to this when he declared that "The key issue is whether we will build our connectivity through consultative processes or more unilateral decisions. Our preference is for the former … But we cannot be impervious to the reality that others may see connectivity as an exercise in hard-wiring that influences choices."

Former Indian foreign secretary Shyam Saran, however, believes otherwise. In a column in The Wire, an Indian website, he lucidly dissected China's economic and strategic motivations behind the "Belt and Road" initiative, and argued that "Currently, India has neither the resources nor the political and economic weight to put in place competitive and alternative connectivity networks on a global scale.

Therefore, for the time being, it may be worthwhile to carefully evaluate those components of the 'Belt and Road' initiative which may improve India's own connectivity to major markets and resource supplies and become participants in them ..."

As far as India's alignment with the US rebalance to the Asia-Pacific goes, I would argue that the recent Indo-US bonhomie has its own dynamics, and it would be naive to assume that it is solely based on an apparent need to "balance" China's growing clout in the region.

Despite the repositioning of its "Look East" policy into an "Act East" one, and its recent aggressive wooing of ASEAN nations, as well as Australia, Japan and the US in the region, New Delhi is more concerned about the India Ocean region than the Pacific or specifically, the South China Sea. Of course India has growing commercial and strategic interests in the region, as exemplified by the row over India's oil exploration rights in Vietnam, but I don't see India and the US undertaking joint patrols of the South China Sea anytime soon. I personally find it intriguing that Washington expects other nations to adhere to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea while it refuses to ratify the treaty itself.

India's relationship with China (and the US) is mostly issue based. For instance, the two nations are completely aligned on issues like climate change and the need for a multi-polar world. They are both members of the BRICS grouping of emerging nations, as well as several other multi-lateral regional and international fora.

But trust issues remain. Among them are the long-standing border disputes, Chinese concerns about the Dalai Lama's asylum in India and the perception that India is muscling into areas traditionally seen as China's sphere of influence in South and Southeast Asia, the massive trade imbalance in China's favor, the presence of the PLA in Pakistan-administered Kashmir, China's recent veto of India's attempt to designate Masood Azhar, head of the Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed as a terrorist by the UN, India's perception that Beijing wants to limit it to regional power by encircling it through its "String of Pearls," and of course the intense competition for oil and other resources across the world to power the growth of the two nations.

I believe that the world is big enough for both India and China to grow and flourish, and take their rightful place at the top table. But for that to happen, Beijing and New Delhi need to start finding ways to reduce the trust deficit and start seeing each other as friends, and not with suspicion. Because after all, our common interests exceed our differences.

The author is an Indian foreign and strategic affairs analyst. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn