They are not diversifying from China because of China. They are because of deteriorating relations with the West that may put them at risk in case of, for instance, sanctions against China.
The West will have some deteriorating relations with India as well if India decides to start ethnic cleansing or stripping citizenship from 100 million Muslims. Consider how much business we do with Burma (approximately $0), even though the labor is quite cheap there. The BBC documentary is a warning shot.
To be clear, this is not about the West taking sides in religious or ethnic issues; there are limits on what kinds of violence people are willing to accept in the supply chain. China is incredibly hard to divorce from, but we're doing it.
> there are limits on what kinds of violence people are willing to accept in the supply chain. China is incredibly hard to divorce from, but we're doing it.
What may or may not happening in China has nothing to do with it. The issue is geopolitical and the seemingly collision course between an increasingly powerful China and the West, especially the USA.
Edit: Likewise, with China the #1 threat the West will want to keep India on side. An example is Russia: India has been keeping its trade with Russia, and even increased it since the war in Ukraine started. The West has been very quiet on that.
The BBC documentary itself is rather benign and brings nothing new to the table other than elevating a UK viewpoint over what many locals have done in the 2 decades in between. If anything, it only displays the BBC’s colonial biases.
The response to this run of the mill documentary which likely no one would have watched and/or heard about has been chilling. The Modi government has absolutely embarrassed itself and has basically gone out of its way to prove that whatever the documentary says is correct, whether it is or isn’t. And the doubling down will hurt not just the governments but also the country’s image.
Between India and China you're looking at roughly a 1/4 of the world population. This makes it hard to use sanctions in ways that work better against smaller, less critical countries (like Iran, Myanmar). Even Russia, which doesn't hold quite the same level has been painful for Europe to sanction.
It's also problematic having to fight battles on all fronts at once (and at home for the US, which isn't exactly at the height of democracy itself)[0].
It's also worth being aware that much of the world sees the other side of the US, meddling and not really doing so in the best interests of the local population (not to mention UK colonial history).
We're in this funny place where the US often dictates globally but the protections that are in place with it's own laws only extend as far as citizens. Which is where you end up with all the 5-eyes spying on each other and sharing intel, thereby avoiding the protections put in place to prevent the domestic use of those capabilities[1].
The third paragraph is most crucial. Having said that, as an Asian I'm super puzzled with Western countries tendency to moralizing and lecturing other countries internal matter.
Is it wrong to bring up bad treatment of a citizens countries to the leadership of that country? Western countries in feel comfortable doing this because in general they treat their citizens far better than other countries treat their own.
We can't let past failure stop the criticisms of genocide and slips into authoritarian behaviour. We all (globally) have to try to hold each other to account.
>We all (globally) have to try to hold each other to account.
I'm sorry but De facto it is kinda ridiculous. Since "western" entities almost completely control media and influence. Criticism always occur one way street.
Al Jazeera, scmp, nhk, cna, Hindustantimes, haaretz and even al arabiya are all becoming more common. I'm in the American southeast. Please dont generalize.
> Criticism always occur one way street.
? What kind of sources are you listening to? Even the Rupert Murdoch ones are filled with vitriol critizing their respective regions. A publication having a xenophobic bent, and that being useful to politicians is another tangential thing.
