Engaging thought

Arunachal Pradesh

The border tension between two rising Asian powers, China and India is not a newly emerging issue; its root stretch back to the 1950s. The origin of the conflict lies in Chinese annexation of Tibet in 1959. Historically, Tibet has been best known as a buffer state in Asia, particularly between Mongol emperors and Chinese dynasties. After India became independent from British rule and Mao’s revolution founded the Communist Party in China in 1949, the traditional relation between two countries dramatically altered.

The Mao ambition to colonize Tibet faced opposition and strong vocal objection from Nehru’s India. When China completely occupied Tibet in 1959, Indian government was left without any option except military action to force the Chinese presence out of Tibet. Since military operation is costly, Nehru was caught up in a complex calculation of India’s military capacity and the cost of war and he finally failed without strategic action.

In May 23, 1951, Mao called representatives from the Tibetan government and forced them to sign a treaty, known as Seventeen Points Agreement. The Seventeen Points Agreement was signed against the will of the Tibetan representatives and some of the members were gradually imprisoned due to their objection. Chinese government even used duplicate seal of the Tibetan government. The rising Chinese aggression and China’s plot to kidnap the Dalai Lama in 1959 forced the Dalai Lama to escape to India. When the Dalai Lama and his official reached the Indian border, Bomdhi La, the Dalai Lama officially denounced the Seventeen Point Agreement internationally in a press conference, which the Chinese government claimed to be a legal foundation of PLA’s (People’s Liberation Army) rule over Tibet.

After the Seventeen Point Agreement, the Nehru sought a friendlier political relation with Beijing and signed a treaty called Punchsheel Agreement. In which Indian government headed by Nehru recognized China’s sovereignty over Tibet. The Punchsheel Agreement was the biggest failure of Nehru, a man who was respected as a visionary leader. It was a failure of Nehru’s vision to secure India and maintain regional peace and stability in Asia.

The border tension between two rising Asian giants was further escalated in recent years with China’s repeated military incursion into Indian Territory. In the last two years, more than 100 incidences of minor incursions have been reported in Ladhak and Skim regions which were traditionally and legally part of Indian Territory and currently under the control of New Delhi. All these gestures by Beijing are perceived as provocative by New Delhi but so far the Indian government has shown restraint and is unwilling to have direct military action which might lead to the repetition of the 1962 War. There is no standard demarcation of the border line between the two states in the north eastern frontier, particularly the border between Tibet and India. The legal frame work of border demarcation exists, which was settled by a treaty called the ”Shimla convention” signed by British India, China and the Tibetan government in 1914. Although China rejected the ”Shimla Convention” as legal basis for border demarcation, but both the Indian government and the Tibetans strongly perceive it as historically significant and recognize it as a legal yardstick of border measurement.

China’s claim of the Arunachal Pradesh (state) as part of Chinese territory is a heated dispute between two states in contemporary history. Recently, China has objected Indian prime minister’s visit to Arunachal state for an election rally which then led to strong criticism from the Indian government. Particularly, Indian public anger toward China’s reaction pressures New Delhi to take a tougher action against China’s deflated claim. Arunachal state had been a part of India before Chinese colonization of Tibet. The complexity of this issue come from the region’s close cultural and religious connection with Tibet. For example, most of China accusation is based on Tibetan documents. Meanwhile, China’s claim of Arunachal state might be a small step of territorial encroachment, yet a giant political leap for Beijing’s hegemonic ambition, that might have far reaching consequences. New Delhi should be careful when dealing with China on the territorial dispute, because repeating Nehru’s mistake will be severe damage to its growing power and future peace and stability.

The rising temperature between the two Asian powers is sign of future clash. The 1962’s Sino-Indian border war is a testimony of history. Many political scientists view China’s action as containing India’s political influence in the South Asian region. For example, China’s diplomatic move to extend cooperation with Pakistan in trading weapons and infrastructure development is clear sign of ”containment” by isolating India via forming alliances with its neighbors. Nepal is another issue, perceivably insignificant on the surface of international relations, but in substance it is strategically important to India both geographically and politically. Rising Maoist insurgency in Nepal pose serious threat to India and its political stability.

By examining the nature and root of Sino-Indian territorial conflict, the complexity of the dispute embedded in the question of Tibet and its status is obvious. As long as the Tibetan issue remains, the Sino-Indian conflict will continue. The only way to resolve Sino-Indian border dispute and maintain regional peace and stability in the Asian continent is to neutralize the Tibetan issue as Professor Dawa Norbu suggested. Norbu argued “Tibet is a legal foundation on which the both India and China’s border claim rest” (1997, p. 1094) I personally believe that the Line of Actual Control; the border between the two countries has definitely no meaning unless the Tibetan issue has resolved. As the Indian government believes, the restoration of Tibet as a buffer zone is the most effective and available solution on the table. This can be done through peaceful means of Gandhian philosophy rather than military assault. It is time for the Indian government to use Gandhi’s path effectively and seriously to forge a congenial atmosphere for long lasting peace and friendship with Beijing.

Note: This article has published in Earlham Word (weekly news and events)

October 23, 2009