Geopolitics

Sino-Indian border imbroglio
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
Issue Vol. 23.4 Oct-Dec 2008 | Date : 19 Feb , 2011

China launched full scale invasion on India in 1962. In fact, Chinese invasion had commenced way back in 1906 when it maneuvered and succeeded in concluding the 1906 Convention in Calcutta.

In this Convention, China was recognized as the suzerain of Tibet. By doing so, Britain virtually handed over Tibet to China .Thus China was no foreign power to Tibet; she was her suzerain instead. This heralded the foundation of Sinkiang Province with Tibet’s South Eastern and Eastern boundaries overrun by Manchus Army .By sheer providence Tibet survived. Manchus were overthrown in 1911 with Chinese troops rising in revolt against their officers. This led to Britain helping in repatriation of Chinese soldiers through India. Tibet declared her independence in 1912. Britain wanted to annul the provisions of 1906 treaty. They held the Shimla Convention in 1914. Prolonged deliberations between Britain, China and Tibet took place prior to the holding of this Convention.

The 1962 debacle was a national shame that was avoidable had the Chiefs of Staff advised Nehru on the tactical, strategic and pragmatic dimensions of this tall order!

The trade interests of Britain hindered their desire to settle the Indo -Tibetan frontier. Chinese design to expand southwards and Tibet wanting to remain independent, were conflicting .While McMahon Line was demarcated on the map, ‘Outer-Inner’ Tibet boundaries were drawn .China wanted Tibet to be declared an integral part of China . China at this point and time did not want to annoy Britain, and Tibet but in consonance with her design, did not commit to any permanent solution of the national frontier. China consented to the agreements of Shimla Convention but did not ratify the same. The entire attitude of the British was half-hearted towards the Shimla Convention. In the mean time, Sun Yat-Sen had formed a strong political party on modern lines in 1917- known as the Kuomintang, “The National Peoples Party” or KMT in short. Chiang Kai-Shek took over KMT in 1925 and ruled china till he was overthrown by the communists in 1949. India became independent in1947 and she inherited the dispute from the British .If British had wanted, they, with a stroke of the pen could have easily settled the issue.

Mao replaced Chiang in 1949. He had a two point agenda. First to invade ,occupy, assimilate , and harmonize Tibet, and second , to dominate the southern slopes of the last highest range of the Himalayas from the Chinese side and the first from the Indian side. This was accomplished by Mao with precision. Tibet was invaded in 1950. The Govt of India formally declared Tibet as a part of China. Nehru helped China in accomplishing and harmonizing Tibet. India acted not only naïve but remained a mute spectator to these happenings near her vitals.Why was Nehru trying to make friends with a race with whom India has no similarity, and why this open trust and friendship was being exhibited to a neighbour we do not even understand till date, is beyond comprehension ! There is no commonality between India and China.

While China was consolidating her gains all along the northern borders from 1947 till 1962, Indians were generally not aware about the Chinese activities. With a totally dismal intelligence network and a system coupled with apathy and indifference from ‘powers that be’, India was living in her own world under the Nehruvian mindset and in an utopian world of her own creation. To top it, Nehru with boyish alacrity went ahead to introduce Chou-en-Lai at the Bangdung Conference and forcefully advocated a berth for China in the United Nations. He went ahead with Panchsheel and the slogan ‘Hindi-Chini Bhai-Bhai’, little realizing that there was no brotherly element between the two so called brothers. The shrewd Chinese were enjoying the fun and taking full advantage of the situation.

Also read: Leapfrog the Technological Cap

Chou-en-Lai was invited to take salute at the Passing Out Parade at the National Defence Academy, Kharakvasla and was even taken to some defence establishments. Possibly ,Nehru was carving a niche for himself as an international statesman fully knowing that his initiative in 1948 to go to the United Nations seeking solution of the JandK problem had yielded nothing except generating adverse criticism at home.

Chinese continued to expand in Aksai Chin and elsewhere at will and Indian weak protests /representations were brushed aside as minor aberrations in interpretations of maps.

Chinese continued to expand in Aksai Chin and elsewhere at will and Indian weak protests /representations were brushed aside as minor aberrations in interpretations of maps. Nehru ill-advised, aided and abetted by his foreign ministry diplomats, ‘Yes Ministers’, and a super ambitious General declared, on the floor of the Parliament that India should throw the Chinese out. The most ridiculous thing was that the then ‘ Yes Chief of Army Staff ‘ had no conviction and compunction to tell either the Prime Minister or the Defence Minister that the Indian Army was not prepared and equipped to take the so called ‘Forward Policy’ to its logical conclusion. The 1962 debacle was a national shame that was avoidable had the Chiefs of Staff advised Nehru on the tactical, strategic and pragmatic dimensions of this tall order! It was unfortunate that the geo-political and geo-strategic realities were not taken cognizance of. Unfortunately the situation is much the same even today. This was the second big national security blunder .We somehow have not come out of that the ‘China Mindset ‘ even today. Our policies and strategies are not in keeping with the ground realities and future perspectives.

The Indian scenario is replete with such strategic blunders. After the 1965 Indo-Pak War, we again lost on the negotiating table at Tashkent, wherein we returned the strategic Haji Pir Pass and other territories of strategic importance and significance, captured by our brave soldiers at the cost of their precious lives .Our politicians signed on the agreement without realizing the long term effects or repercussions. Just imagine Line of Control was agreed upon which abruptly terminated at NJ 9847 without defining on paper any schedules of joint survey beyond this point, or putting in black and white the future course of action/sequence of action.

Today if we talk of Saltoro Ridge as the watershed boundary, at least some mention of this ground reality even recognized by International Law could have been made in the agreement .The Pakistanis very conveniently drew a line on their map joining NJ 9847 with Karakoram Pass thus giving birth to the Siachen Dispute. It may be recalled that a sizeable portion of the Shaksgham Valley of J and K had been illegally gifted by Pakistan to China in 1963.The height of all blunders was the Shimla Agreement when India returned 92,000 Prisoners of War to Pakistan without getting anything in return. We are Samaritans and ‘Good People’ who do not keep our national interests in mind and do-not learn from history. Today, India is surrounded by countries which are anti India and armed by China.

Also read: Technologies and National Security

Growing Chinese naval presence in the Indian Ocean is a warning signal .Increasing sectarian violence and terrorist activities are a bye-product of failure of our foreign policy with neighbouring countries. All this growing animosity does not augur well. Indian foreign policy is controversial, in that, it is not clear whether she is in pursuit of world peace all on her own, or, she is pursuing to help the expansionists and the political and commercial opportunists to economically dominate without keeping note of her vital national interests.

In his letter written to Nehru on 07 November 1950, Sardar Patel wrote. “My own feeling is that unless we assure our supplies of arms, ammunition and armour, we would be making our defence position perpetually weak and we would not be able to stand up to the double threat of difficulties both from the West and North-West and North and North-East.” What perspicious words and what a perception! Alas, Nehru did not take heed of this long term strategic perspective and advice. Ever since 1947, Indian foreign policy record has been dismal. It has taken the line of individual personalities, political parties and their interests and not the supreme national interests that keep on changing in conformity with the dynamic geo-political and geo-strategic situations and developments.

It is sad that India does not have a National Strategy document. Unless we define our National Strategy, how can we define National Aims, Objectives, Goals, Perspectives and the National Security Strategy? When we do not have a National Security Strategy, how can the Army, the Navy and the Air Force define their respective strategies and perspective plans. Obviously, the heads of the services devise their own strategies – mostly based on individual perceptions and personalities. There are some Raksha Mantri Directives available but these are piecemeal and do not encompass elements of National Strategy.

Lets also not forget that during President R Venkatramans visit to Beijing, China conducted its nuclear test, let us also not overlook the growing Sino-Pak nexus. As Chanakya said: “Watch thy neighbour and “˜my enemys enemy is my best friend “˜.

This results in knee jerk reactions (mostly unwanted) to international developments ending up in ‘foot in mouth disease ‘ which is not only embarrassing but damaging as well. It is high time that India formulates a National Strategy document and based on which, various organs of the centre and states should function keeping the perspective plans in constant view. Ofcourse mid-way corrections are needed since no permanent friendship exists between nation-states .There are only permanent interests that vary from time to time.

India must understand that the long record of India – China history contributes directly towards the present hostility between the two countries. Tension keeps on sprouting up owing to the dogged and bizarre Chinese ethno-centric behaviourial pattern or the ‘sino-centrism’ of the Middle Kingdom. Are not 46 years enough to solve the Sino-Indian border dispute? China has settled her border disputes with all her neighbours except India. They have been selective in their approach to solving border disputes. It is a strategy of double standards but how does it matter to them! They are in no hurry. They have the cake in Aksai Chin and they are eating it too! Further, they have claimed almost entire Arunachal Pradesh and Barahoti in Uttarakhand.With Aksai Chin and Shaksgham Valley with China and Northern Areas and POK with Pakistan – all illegally possessed, the northern head of India has become triangular. What is India doing about it?

A democratic and growing India must show assertive approach and not accept Chinese tantrums. Treaties, traditions, usages, rules, customs and historical facts need to be taken cognizance of, but China too has to take note of International Law and provisions of well established norms that dictate relations between nation- states. India can no longer afford to be soft. Both India and China are growing powers in Asia, and while China’s diplomacy and assertiveness is displayed from the position of strength (since they hold vast stretch of Indian territory ), India too must match with moral,diplomatic and military ascendency in selected areas.

Also read: Is this how we treat our military?

While we know that the Sino-Indian dispute is linked with questions embracing ideology and balance of power, the dispute is not capable of solution by itself. Any sincere endeavour to solve the boundary problem would mean creation of an environment of mutual trust and near ideal conditions between both countries which is not possible presently. Chinese actions very often smack of hostility and lack of sincerity towards India. India is not in a position presently to grant any major concession to China and for that matter Pakistan. Sino-Indian border dispute has invited enough polemics in the past and will continue to do so in future. This multi dimensional and hydra-headed problem will linger on and there appears no light at the end of the tunnel. With increasing Sino-Pak nexus, these is no hope of solving the Sino-Indian dispute in the near future.

Let us not forget that Chinas nuclear deal with Pakistan was signed in the same year when Deng Xiaoping was shaking Rajiv Gandhis hand.

As earlier said, the Chinese ethno-centricity overrides the International Law in so far it affects its interests. China’s mindset dictates that her role is dependent upon political considerations unlike India and other countries of the world. Even China’s judicial system serves its political activities and is brought to bear on all political tasks and movements. China subscribes to the view that the International Law is scoped within the state’s foreign policy. This attitude of China is very clear in context of the boundary problem. We have been underestimating Chinese sensitivity British origin of the border, and over the asylum given to Dalai Lama. Let us not forget that China’s nuclear deal with Pakistan was signed in the same year when Deng Xiaoping was shaking Rajiv Gandhi’s hand. Let’s also not forget that during President R Venkatraman’s visit to Beijing, China conducted its nuclear test, let us also not overlook the growing Sino-Pak nexus. As Chanakya said: “Watch thy neighbour’ and ‘my enemy’s enemy is my best friend ‘.

Let’s not forget that very recently China tried to create hurdles in the 123 Agreement with the USA and has now promised to give two atomic reactors to Pakistan. Various diplomatic embarrassments to India have been caused in the past by China. Let us also not forget that China is outstripping India in economic growth and considers India as a rival on all fronts. Let us also not forget that China took India on the complacent path stating that she is carrying out her modernization plans and in its garb continues to improve her defence potential and border infrastructure opposite Indian Border.

It was amazing to hear three consecutive Army Chiefs stating in the open that China is no threat to India. Obviously they were speaking the political language and escaping from their responsibilities of apprising the Government of the ground realities. It was amazing to know that the primary operational tasks of some of our formations deployed in sensitive borders with China were in totally different borders. The intelligence network and inputs continue to be primitive and not updated. Let us not have Kargil type situations on the Sino-Indian border ! While our policy of engaging China must carry on and collaboration on all fronts must increase, we have to maintain our guard most befittingly. Any misadventure from China must meet a very prompt and punitive military response.

It is unfortunate that the three Chiefs have not been included as permanent Members of the Cabinet Committee of Security (CCS).They are called only if their need is felt !

The Chiefs of Staff Committee must not remain satisfied by merely pushing DO letters to the Government; they must assert in the national interest. This is their bounden duty and they must unitedly ensure impregnable defence of our borders with matching strike capabilities. It is unfortunate that the three Chiefs have not been included as permanent Members of the Cabinet Committee of Security (CCS).They are called only if their need is felt ! The Government may like to appoint them as permanent Members. With their vast experience and knowledge they will prove assets to any deliberation of CCS.

Sino-Indian relations have no doubt improved in the recent years but this should not lead to any complacency. While discussions to continue to explore the framework of boundary settlement, from the political perspective of the overall bilateral relationship must continue, India should take due measures to ensure her territorial integrity in letter and spirit. India has to get out of the existing ‘China Mindset’ and raise vast network of communications and infrastructure to meet any contingency in Northern, Central and Eastern Sectors. With a powerful Navy and Air Force, India must be prepared at all times to respond to any situation .China has of late constructed new high altitude airfields in Tibet. Her infrastructure and strategic capability in Tibet and further East is far improved. All major passes up to the Indian borders can be reached by good roads. Her rail and oil pipe lines network is equally impressive .India must respond by matching infrastructure.

Vast stretches of Indian territory in the Northern Sector (15,000 square miles) is under Chinese occupation. China also lays claim to 32,000 sq miles of Indian territory in Arunachal Pradesh. Whether it will be tactically viable for Indian Armed Forces to evict the illegal occupations both by China and Pakistan is a matter for the military experts to judge but India must see the writing on wall. China also lays claim to Barahoti in Uttarakhand. Must India continue living like this with no perspective planning to address the explosive nature of the issue? One cannot be optimistic in the long run since the damage potential of the imbroglio is capable of not only creating sparks but may eventually explode. Time has now come to apprise the nation about the border disputes both with China and Pakistan and seek national referendum on these burning issues. Are there any takers? One thing is for sure, it pays to be strong and India must define and assert her strength and stance before she is caught off guard and embarrassed. Already many precious years have been lost Both, trade and diplomacy need to be executed from a position of strength.

Rate this Article
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
The views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of the Indian Defence Review.

About the Author

More by the same author

Post your Comment

2000characters left