Amid flight delays owing to a typhoon, nearly 3,000 journalists from across the globe trickled into the coastal hub of Xiamen, the venue of the ninth summit of the Brazil-Russia-India-China-South Africa (BRICS) grouping, held earlier this month.

For the next few days, a sprawling media centre would be their home. Every half an hour, shuttle buses from designated hotels brought them to their new workplace. The last bus would leave the venue at 10.30 p.m., long after the sun had gone down in the neighbouring South China Sea.

The Chinese had ensured that all the arrangements were spot on, to the last detail. Journalists could access 700 work stations connected with high-speed Internet, plug-in audio links, and two electric points. Giant screens in the media hall showed the opulent red-carpet welcome for the heads. No effort was spared to ensure that messages coming from the top leaders were relayed to the media in near-real-time.

The hosts had also ensured that a vast dining area, serving a wide variety of food, was in full swing right from the crack of dawn. It met the expectations of most of the media assemblage, though the vegetarians may justifiably have had something to complain.

Impact of Doklam

For the Indian media, the Doklam stand-off naturally coloured the coverage of the BRICS summit. With the convergence of the five emerging economy heads, a new door in India-China ties seemed to be opening, as word was out soon after the conference began that a meeting between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping had been confirmed. But how wide would this door be set ajar by the two principals? Would it be tightly shut once again by new headwinds that may be brewing, but were yet beyond perception?

China’s decision not to object to the listing of Pakistan-based outfits — like the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) and the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) — on the list of international terrorist groups imparted guarded optimism ahead of the Modi-Xi parleys.

Critics are right in pointing out the similarity in the statement on counterterrorism read out at the BRICS summit and the language used in slamming extremism in the closing document of the Heart of Asia conference in Amritsar.

But there are crucial differences between the two. First, the Amritsar declaration was at a ministerial level. The one at BRICS in Xiamen was from the heads of state, imparting weight to the document. Second, the Chinese had earlier rejected the listing of the JeM and the LeT on the world terror roll. But, in Xiamen, the Chinese relented, marking a clear shift in their stance. How durable this shift would be is a pertinent question. Will it translate, with China’s endorsement, into a much-sought-after ban on Masood Azhar, head of JeM, when his status is debated at the UN 1267 committee in October?

Next month, China is heading into a party congress, which will change the leadership complexion in Beijing — a development that is likely to impact the future course of India-China ties.

Pakistan’s response to the signals emerging from Xiamen will also be crucial. A mode of denial will be unhelpful. But in case Islamabad undertakes a “clean break” from its past as advocated by its Foreign Minister Khawaja Asif, the BRICS summit may prove crucial in rebooting India’s ties not only with China, but possibly with other countries in its neighbourhood, including Pakistan.

Atul Aneja works for The Hindu and is based in Beijing.