Daily Times

IN 1950, Chairman Mao Zedong standing in front of Tiananmen Square, said that Tibet was China’s right hand palm and its five fingers, alluding to Ladakh, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan and Arunachal Pradesh, have been detached from the country and are either in the occupation of India or are under its influence. It is the responsibility of China to liberate the five to be joined with Xizang (Tibet). It was Mao who laid the foundation of China’s expansionist policy.

In 1962, in order to liberate two of its fingers, Mao attacked India, and his soldiers lodged offensive in both Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh. The soldiers of the Peoples Liberation Army managed to enter Tawang in the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh. However, they withdrew because the United States was planning to come to India’s aid. It still continues to illegally occupy 38,000 sq.kms of land in the Aksai Chin region, claiming that the Aksai Chin region was always a part of Tibet.

Recently, the Chinese soldiers illegally entered the Doko-La (Donglong), at a place at the Sikkim-Bhutan-Tibet tri-junction. The areas has been relatively been peaceful till China decided to build road to an area called the Dokalam Plains, an area which is claimed by Bhutan  and China. China’s claim that they were building road within their territory has been rejected by Bhutan. In fact, Bhutan has issued a demarche to China that its attempt to extend the road towards a camp of the Royal Bhutan Army at Zom Pelri will have serious ramifications and, moreover, it is also a direct violation of the 1988 and 1998 agreements between the two countries.

As far as India is concerned, there subsists a defence treaty with Bhutan where India is responsible in securing its interests. China is miffed with India as the disputed territory does not belong to India. India is concerned that if China builds a road It can have serious security implications for India as it will give access to India’s North East region via the Siliguri corridor.

In fact, the standoff between the two countries came into the public domain only when China sent back Indian pilgrims, who were on their way to Kailash Mansarovar in Tibet through the Nathu-la route in Sikkim. India was surprised with China’s transgression in the region because the India-China boundary in Sikkim-Tibet is not disputed under the Anglo-Chinese Convention of 1890, and which was also clearly demarcated in 1895. Moreover, both sides have taken pride in not allowing border incidents to affect other aspects of the bilateral relationship.

India recently issued an 11 point letter rejecting the Chinese allegations that “India that had encroached on their territory. In this context, the Indian side has underlined that the two Governments had in 2012 reached an agreement that the tri-junction boundary points between India, China and third countries will be finalized in consultation with the concerned countries. Any attempt, therefore, to unilaterally determine tri-junction points are in violation of this understanding”.

One theory that is going the rounds in India is that the Chinese incursion is as a result of India’s refusal to join the ‘One Belt and One Road” (OBOR) project. The mega $ 2 trillion Belt & Road project, which straddles both economics and politics, in an effort to transform China into a land and sea power. India, suspicious of China’s expansion in the region, and also citing security and economic concerns, has steadfastly refused to join the project. According to experts, India’s refusal may make the project unviable for China.  It is for this reason that they are trying to browbeat India into joining the project. There has been a blitzkrieg in the Chinese media criticizing India’s refusal to join OBOR.

There have been several reasons explaining the Chinese aggression north and South East Asia, and now in the Indian sub-continent. One of the probable reasons for the Chinese boldness is the incoherent and confused foreign policy of Donald Trump. First, he backed out on the Trans Pacific Partnership multilateral trade agreement, which was originally conceived to counter balance China’s growing ambition in the South East Asia. Secondly, the waning US influence in South China Sea, has led China to adopt an aggressive posture with smaller countries over their dispute on Scarborough shoals. Some of the countries like the Philippines, not sure of the US support, and not in a position to take on the might of China, have thought it prudent to be on the right side of China. They are now directly negotiating with China, even after an International Arbitration Board has given a decision regarding the ownership of Scarborough shoals in their favour. China has refused to abide by the award of the arbitration board and is fast militarizing at the disputed site in spite of International condemnation.

Lately, China’s aggressive posture with South Korea in boycotting their products and also closing two dozen retail stores of South Korea’s Lotte Group amid a diplomatic standoff over the US deployment of Terminal High Altitude Area Defence THAAD) has cast a chill over business ties between the two nations. Mongolia had to kowtow to the Chinese pressure of blockade over His Holiness Dalai Lama’s private visit to their country.

Both China and India should be credited with maintaining a peaceful border for over five decades. China should not vitiate the cordial relations with India by expanding its road connectivity into the Bhutanese and the Indian territory as it has the potential in escalating the conflict. Recently, the spokesman of the Chinese foreign ministry issued a veiled warning to India that they should not forget the ‘lessons of history’, a veiled reference to the 1962 war. China should realise that India of today is different from the 1962 India. India is militarily better prepared to deal with any eventuality. Notwithstanding, the military might of both the countries, utmost restraint should be displayed by strictly adhering to the status quo.

At a time when India is locked in a dispute with Pakistan over occupied Kashmir, we are seeing escalations at the Line of Control with both the sides engaging in cross border firing. India, therefore, is not interested in opening another front with China. It is for this reason it has established back channel communication with China to amicably settle the dispute. China, on the other hand, should realise that if they aspire to assume global leadership, they should abandon their aggressive approach with their neighbours. Instead, they should find solutions to end their dispute in a spirit of understanding and mutual cooperation. As far as India is concerned, it should continue to engage with China to diffuse the tension.

China should also appreciate that India has steadfastly refused to join the US-Japan axis to counterbalance China.  Recently, India declined an Australian invitation to take part in multilateral naval war exercises; as such an act would not have gone down well with China and would have further escalated the tensions between the two countries. All this may change now, if China continues to escalate tensions at the border. China should stop acting like a bully with its neighbours as such a strategy would hinder its efforts to become a global power. Both Xi Jinping and Modi should deescalate the tensions at the border through dialogue.

The writer is an independent columnist and political commentator