“India In”, “China Out”: How the Maldives Flipped the Script on Beijing

• China’s debt-heavy investments in the Maldives failed to build lasting trust or influence.
• Maldivian President Muizzu, once backed by anti-Bharat rhetoric, is now restoring ties with New Delhi.
• Bharat’s soft power, tourism, and civilizational links proved more enduring than Chinese funding.
• The Maldives reversal reflects a broader regional trend of China’s declining influence in South Asia.

 

Paromita Das

New Delhi, 28th July: For over a decade, Beijing viewed the Maldives not just as a picturesque string of islands in the Indian Ocean, but as a strategic jewel critical to its maritime ambitions. With the Belt and Road Initiative as its spearhead, China poured billions into infrastructure and political influence, positioning the Maldives as a future logistics hub and surveillance outpost to secure key shipping lanes.

From roadways to bridges and government loans, Beijing’s toolkit seemed well-stocked. But beneath the glossy façade of Chinese investment lay opaque loan terms, rising public dissatisfaction, and a creeping dependency. The objective was clear: erode Bharat’s influence in its own maritime backyard and replace it with Beijing’s own shadow.

From “India Out” to “India In”

This strategy found political expression in the 2023 rise of Mohamed Muizzu, a leader who ran a campaign with a clear slogan: “India Out”. Backed by digital disinformation campaigns and amplified by Pakistan’s support, Muizzu came to power promising to end Bharat’s military and diplomatic footprint in the island nation. For a brief moment, China appeared victorious.

But within two years, the tide turned. Muizzu greeted Bharatiya Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the airport—a powerful reversal. In an even more potent symbol of shifting tides, Bharat is now set to build the new Maldivian Ministry of Defence. The same leader who once called for Bharat’s exit now relies on New Delhi for vital defence infrastructure.

The Disinformation Campaign That Backfired

China’s digital armada—memes, fake accounts, bots—was crucial in tilting the Maldivian political climate. Anti-Bharat sentiment surged across social media platforms, with narratives about sovereignty and occupation flooding the local discourse. But that short-lived wave could not withstand the harder truths of economic reality.

Chinese projects stalled, loans weighed heavily on the budget, and resentment began to rise. Meanwhile, Bharatiya tourists—who represent a huge chunk of Maldives’ economy—remained loyal. Beijing’s billions couldn’t build what centuries of civilizational intimacy between Bharat and Maldives had already cemented: trust.

Civilizational Ties vs. Cash Diplomacy

This is where China’s strategy meets its fatal flaw. Bharat’s influence in the Maldives—and South Asia at large—is not transactional. It is rooted in religion, language, migration, and shared history.

From Buddhism to regional trade routes, from Bollywood to Ayush medical exchanges, Bharat’s soft power is subtle, natural, and enduring. China’s approach, by contrast, is top-down and often viewed as self-serving. Loans come with strings. Infrastructure comes with surveillance. And influence is wrapped in opacity, not openness.

Déjà Vu in South Asia

The Maldives is not an isolated case. China has faced similar setbacks across South Asia:

• Sri Lanka: The Hambantota port became a symbol of debt diplomacy gone wrong. When the island nation collapsed economically, Bharat—not China—offered immediate aid.
• Nepal: Despite deep political meddling, China has struggled to displace Bharat’s religious and cultural connect.
• Bhutan: Beijing’s coercive diplomacy has only pushed Thimphu closer to New Delhi.
• Pakistan: The flagship CPEC remains incomplete. Gwadar port, its crown jewel, has seen attacks on Chinese engineers and growing resentment from locals.

Why China Keeps Misfiring

At the heart of these failures is a strategic misunderstanding. Beijing views influence as something to be bought, not earned. Its diplomatic culture is hierarchical, its worldview shaped by control, not cooperation. This model simply does not translate well to the diverse, pluralistic societies of South Asia.

Bharat, despite its own flaws, remains deeply embedded in the regional psyche. Its resilience comes not just from diplomacy, but from people-to-people bonds and civilizational gravity. China’s propaganda machine, which often downplays Bharat’s geopolitical role, fails to grasp this fundamental truth.

A Strategic Misread

Beijing’s consistent underestimation of Bharat’s regional pull reflects a deeper problem—strategic arrogance. Believing that money, loans, and influence operations could dismantle Bharat’s ties in its own backyard was not just naïve—it was dismissive of history.

Bharat’s relationships in South Asia are imperfect, but they are real. No port project or social media blitz can substitute for shared languages, festivals, and decades of cooperation. Until China understands that the subcontinent is not just another frontier for leverage, but a region of cultural complexity, it will continue to misfire.

The Rise of Bharat’s Enduring Soft Power

What the Maldives episode demonstrates is that civilizational depth is a more potent currency than capital. While Beijing continues to pursue short-term gains, Bharat’s influence grows quietly through trust, tradition, and shared identity.

In a region where memory runs deep and relationships are personal, China’s transactional model is not just unsuited—it’s unsustainable. The dragon may roar, but the elephant remembers. And that memory, rooted in civilizational closeness, may just be Bharat’s greatest geopolitical asset.