New Delhi: Though there is uncertainty about how long he can continue reporting from Beijing once his current visa expires in August, K.J.M. Varma continues to be the last surviving member of the Indian press corps in China – a group that once numbered as many as six reporters just a few years ago.On Friday, June 16, the Foreign Correspondents Club of China (FCCC) posted a statement that it was “concerned and saddened” that four Indian journalists have lost their ability to work in China. It noted there was “no representation” from India in China, just as there was zero representation from Australia and Canada.FCCC statement on Indian journalists in China pic.twitter.com/RbLGHwA0gd— Foreign Correspondents’ Club of China (@fccchina) June 16, 2023The club further called on both the Chinese and Indian governments to allow journalists to do their jobs. “We urge China to live up to its stated commitment to facilitate unhindered reporting across China. At the same time, we urge India not to place undue restrictions on the right of Chinese and other foreign reporters to operate in that country, and deplore the politicization of the granting of journalist visas by any country,” it said in its statement.While the FCCC has said that there are no Indian journalists left in China, the Press Trust of India’s (PTI) Varma remains in Beijing. His press credentials are valid. Similarly, there is a lone Chinese reporter still based in Delhi.But there is no doubt that there has been a drastic reduction in the number of Indian reporters based in China from four at the end of March. Earlier, the Times of India and Indian Express newspapers also used to station reporters in Beijing, but they had left before the pandemic itself.Relations between India and China have been on a rocky path, despite two informal summits to improve strategic understanding between the leadership in 2018 and 2019. As per the Indian foreign minister, relations are at their lowest ebb due to the border stand-off in eastern Ladakh in May 2020, which led to the first fatalities at the Line of Actual Control in four decades.Representative image of Ladakh, where the June 2020 China–India standoff took place. Photo: PTI/FilesThe latest bout over visas for journalists first came to light when two Indian reporters – Ananth Krishnan of The Hindu and Anshuman Mishra of Prasar Bharati – were barred from returning to their post in Beijing. This was done a few days after a Xinhua journalist was asked to leave India by March 31.At the April 6 media briefing in China’s foreign ministry, spokesperson Mao Ning said the reason given was “that he had been in the country for six years”.She said that since the Indian side had gone “further down the wrong path” in not facilitating Chinese journalists, China had “no choice but to take appropriate counter-measures to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese media organizations”.Indicating that any action would be reciprocated, the Chinese spokesperson also said that China would “continue to facilitate Indian journalists” if India takes “positive measures to correct their mistakes”.The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) responded publicly that since there were additional Chinese journalists with valid visas, there were no limits in their reporting from India. At the same time, it set the template of not speaking about the matter in detail for individual journalists, citing privacy concerns.A month later, another Chinese reporter was told to leave India. Thereafter, Hindustan Times correspondent Sutirtho Patranobis, who had been in Beijing since 2012, was told by the Chinese foreign ministry that he would have to leave. His last report from Beijing was dated May 12.A thousand words: @kjmvarma, the last remaining Indian reporter in Beijing, bids farewell at Beijing airport to @spatranobis who left China last week after 11+ years in the country.Photo courtesy a friend. pic.twitter.com/T2qLpeVlAk— Ananth Krishnan (@ananthkrishnan) June 16, 2023The Wall Street Journal reported on May 30 that there would no longer be any Chinese journalists in India as the last two state media reporters had been asked to leave.At the next media briefing, the Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson again gave a detailed answer when a question was raised about the article. She also clarified that there was a single Chinese journalist left in India, whose visa renewal application was still pending.Chinese diplomat and foreign affairs spokesperson Mao Ning. Photo: Wikimedia Commons/China News Service. CC BY-3.0.Mao reiterated that China’s expulsion of Indian journalists till then were “counter-measures”.While denying that Chinese journalists are being harassed, the MEA claimed for the first time that Indian journalists in China “have been operating with certain difficulties, such as not being permitted to hire locals as correspondents or as journalists”.Bloomberg reported on June 12 that the last remaining Indian journalist, K.J.M. Varma got his marching orders from Chinese authorities. That was, however, not correct. On the day that the Bloomberg report was published, PTI’s Editor-in-Chief Vijay Joshi told The Wire that Varma “continues to have a valid Chinese visa”. “There is no change in his status,” he added.In a familiar pattern, the Chinese spokesperson clarified that the two countries still have one correspondent left in each other’s country. She reiterated that the number of Chinese journalists had plummeted from 14 to 1, while India’s had come down from four journalists. She also recommended a browse through the first-person account published by the state-run Xinhua news agency of its former New Delhi bureau chief Hu Xiaoming’s visa travails. Hu had been given a two weeks’ notice to leave India by March 31.In his newsletter, Krishnan, the Hindu reporter whose visa was frozen while he was in India, wrote that the Indian officials’ claim that the troubles began with the hiring of assistants by Indian journalists was not true.“Let me be clear: the expulsions of Indian journalists in China had nothing whatsoever to do with what they were or weren’t doing in the country. Spinning it as such needs rebutting,” he said.He also wrote that the fate of the last Indian reporter hinged on whether the remaining Xinhua journalist would have his visa renewed. While Varma’s visa is still valid till August, the signs are not encouraging that he will remain in China for long. “In all likelihood, an extension will be denied so the last Indian correspondent in China will probably leave in coming weeks [sic]. But that has not yet happened,” Krishnan wrote in his newsletter.In another column published in The Hindu, Krishnan traced the current visa spat to 2017, when India began to only issue three-month-long visas to Chinese journalists. This policy was changed after India expelled three Chinese journalists in 2016, which was apparently due to an unauthorised visit to a Tibetan refugee settlement.The short-term nature of the visa validity period meant that Chinese journalists were not able to settle down in their jobs or rent apartments and open bank accounts. This led to an exodus of several Chinese reporters from India.Then in 2020, China stopped issuing new visas to Indian journalists. India began to retaliate and expelled Chinese reporters. But India did not change its policy after Beijing resumed providing new visas to Indian journalists in 2022.On the question of needing ground reporting, Krishnan said that even with limited access in China, reporters are able to give a glimpse of the “texture of a country that is otherwise impossible to understand – a texture gleaned even from conversations with ordinary people or company executives”.
