Revealing China’s Double Game: Road Construction in Doklam and Strategic Deception

In June 2017, China began extending a road in the Doklam plateau, a disputed region near the tri-junction of China, Bhutan, and India. This construction aimed to reinforce China’s territorial claims and enhance its military mobility near India’s strategically vital Siliguri Corridor. Though aware of prior agreements acknowledging the disputed nature of the area, China pursued the road extension quietly, expecting limited resistance. However, Indian troops, with Bhutan’s tacit consent, intervened to halt the construction, viewing it as a direct threat to regional security. After a tense 73-day standoff, both sides disengaged, restoring the status quo, yet China’s official statements remained deliberately vague, masking coercive actions behind diplomatic ambiguity. This incident foreshadowed China’s more recent Operation Sindoor, were diplomatic overtures towards Pakistan contrast with covert support for Pakistan’s military ambitions against India, exemplifying Beijing’s pattern of masking coercion with diplomacy.

China’s road construction in Doklam was a coercive move aimed at changing the status quo along the India-China-Bhutan border. The road would have enhanced China’s military access near India’s vulnerable Siliguri Corridor, crucial for regional security. Though China presented diplomatic statements emphasizing sovereignty and legality, its aggressive on-ground actions revealed a strategy of “mask diplomacy” projecting peace publicly while seeking to assert control covertly. India, with Bhutan’s tacit approval, intervened swiftly to stop the construction, refusing to accept China’s unilateral claims. The subsequent disengagement restored the previous situation, marking a rare halt to China’s coercive tactics despite Beijing’s ambiguous official narrative.

According to warontherocks.com the Doklam incident unraveled a broader pattern of Beijing’s diplomatic duplicity masking coercive actions across Asia. With several neighbors, China employs a multi-layered approach involving aggressive territorial assertions coupled with diplomatic rhetoric emphasizing dialogue, peace and cooperation. In the South China Sea, China routinely asserts expansive claims known as the “nine-dash line,” which overlap with sovereign claims from the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and others.

Beijing undertakes reclamation projects, militarizes artificial islands and intimidates regional actors with coast guard and naval patrols while publicly engaging in diplomatic negotiations and ostensibly supporting freedom of navigation. Similarly, in the East China Sea, China’s dispute with Japan over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands is characterized by frequent incursions and Chinese fishing fleet deployments backed by paramilitary vessels, juxtaposed with high-level diplomatic dialogues designed to temper conflict perceptions internationally.

China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) further exemplifies the duplicity while promoting prosperity and connectivity, it entangles countries in debt traps and strategic concessions, generating accusations of “debt diplomacy” and coercive leverage, especially in smaller South Asian and African nations.

First Post explained that China’s duplicity during the India-Pakistan conflict reveals its double-faced strategy. While publicly urging restraint and expressing a neutral stance on India’s Operation Sindoor launched against Pakistan-sponsored terrorism, China privately supports Pakistan’s security concerns and military efforts. Chinese state media amplified pro-Pakistan narratives, prompting the Indian Embassy in Beijing to counter Beijing’s false claims on social media. This reflects China’s “mask diplomacy” of projecting peace and friendship in public while covertly empowering Pakistan militarily and politically against India. China’s diplomatic rhetoric clashes starkly with its behind-the-scenes actions, deepening India’s mistrust of Beijing’s regional intentions.

In the view of The Diplomat Newspaper that China’s approach has notably faltered in managing India. India’s firm response at Doklam exposed Beijing’s coercive intentions behind diplomatic façade and curtailed its aspirations for a fait accompli in the Himalayan border region. India’s dual strategy of tactical military intervention paired with calibrated diplomatic protests highlighted its refusal to succumb to coercion cloaked in diplomacy. Moreover, India’s growing strategic partnerships, notably with the United States, Japan and Australia (the Quad) and its enhanced military capabilities have bolstered its defense posture against Chinese assertiveness. Unlike many of China’s neighbors, India exhibits resilience and readiness to counter coercive moves, forcing Beijing to adopt a more cautious approach. China’s diplomatic posturing post-Doklam, including continued claims of sovereignty and denials of aggressive intent, has done little to sway Indian public opinion or strategic policy. Instead, it has hardened Indian resolve and spurred infrastructure and military build-up along disputed borders, nullifying China’s coercive attempts masked as peaceful diplomacy.

China’s diplomatic duplicity has repeatedly surfaced as a strategic tool to conceal coercive ambitions, especially vis-à-vis India. It projects a façade of dialogue, peace and cooperation, while covertly supporting adversaries like Pakistan and aggressively asserting territorial claims in disputed border regions. During the India-Pakistan conflict, China publicly urged restraint yet privately endorsed Pakistan’s military actions, disseminating misinformation to discredit India. Similarly, in the Doklam standoff, Beijing masked aggressive road construction behind diplomatic ambiguity. India’s resolute response exposed this duplicity, highlighting that beneath China’s rhetoric lies a relentless pursuit of geopolitical dominance cloaked in deception challenging regional stability and trust.