New Delhi
19 September 2009
China says it is a good time to settle Sino-Indian boundary question. "The China-India
relationship is currently enjoying stable developments, and the mutual trust between two
sides is keeping growing. Therefore, we are facing a favourable situation in solving the
border issue," the Chinese Foreign Ministry recently told an Indian correspondent based
in Beijing. What prompted the Chinese articulation on the border row? Is it a pious hope
or a Trojan horse? And how should India respond, if at all? The opinion among a section
of the scholars, military strategists and former diplomats, is divided.
National Security Adviser MK Narayanan, who is India's special representative for the
Sino-Indian border talks, says some incremental progress has been made in the several
rounds of talks that he has had with his Chinese counterpart Dai Bingguo. "We are much
more comfortable at this moment than let's say a year ago," he told a television
interviewer. He attributes a rivalry between India and China to India's rise as a
democratic power. "China certainly sees us as its rival and the issue is that they wish to
be the numero uno in this part of the world," he says when asked about China not
considering India as an equal. The rivalry manifests itself in the way both sides
approach a key issue, that of Tawang. The Chinese claim that Tawang, if not the whole of
Arunachal Pradesh, should be handed over to them. The Indian side insists that there
can be no compromise on Tawang, which is an area with a settled population.
Rajiv Sikri, a retired Indian diplomat who last served as Secretary (East) in the Ministry
of External Affairs, says that the Chinese have pushed back the process of resolving
border row by some time with their ramping up of the atmosphere on Arunachal Pradesh
and tough line on the Dalai Lama, not to forget their attitude toward India in the Nuclear
Suppliers Group and on the Asian Development Bank loan for a development project in
Arunachal Pradesh. "This is all part of a pattern and certainly cannot be deemed as
friendly gestures. What kind of progress [are we talking about] when China reiterates its
claim on Arunachal Pradesh? China has gone back on not disturbing areas with settled
population," he says, adding that a lack of understanding in China on how to deal with a
democracy such as India also gives no cause for optimism.
Mr Sikri does not think that China will want to resolve the border row until it gets
satisfaction on the twin issues of Tibet and the Dalai Lama. The situation in Tibet is not
exactly calm, and the talks with the Dalai Lama have broken down. He, therefore, feels
that the heightened rhetoric by the Chinese establishment, coupled with the Chinese
military transgressions, is a well thought out strategy of putting pressure on India to not
complicate Tibet and to keep India bogged down. Also, the more India spends on her
military, the less concentration there can be on economic development and on raising
standards of living.
Srikanth Kondapalli from the New Delhi-based Jawaharlal Nehru University echoes
similar sentiments. He says that the remarks by the Chinese Foreign Ministry should be
seen as a minimalist offer meant to convey that China will be willing to discuss the
border, but not Tibet. He argues that the offer has more to do with the fact that Tibet is
slipping away from China's hand, and the situation in the Xinjiang province is not looking
up, than any genuine desire on the part of the Chinese to resolve the border row. "I'm
pessimistic, because we held several rounds of talks since 1981 without much
progress," Prof Kondapalli told this newspaper when asked whether he thinks the time is
ripe for pushing for a resolution of the border row.
Srinath Raghavan, a Senior Fellow at the New Delhi-based Centre for Policy Research,
says that China's recent activism may reflect not the deterioration of relations with India,
but the fact that the boundary negotiations have actually made some headway. He cites
National Security Adviser MK Narayanan as saying sometime last year that "the more
difficult points are settled" although "divergence" remains on a few outstanding issues.
However, Ambassador Shankar Bajpai (Retd) -- who participated in the first four rounds of
talks in the early '80s -- maintains that the Sino-Indian border row is too complex an
issue for it to resolved by the Special Representatives alone, and political leaderships
of both countries will need to make a special effort.
Rear Admiral Raja Menon (Retd) insists that the Sino-Indian border row has nothing to do
with territory and everything to do with Beijing's desire that India treat China as a
hegemon. "China returned territory it captured in 1962, so what they are looking for is not
adjustment of boundary but acceptance of China's stand on all issues," he told this
newspaper. He believes that India needs to demonstrate her capabilities first before
resuming negotiations with China on the border row for, according to him, old-style
diplomacy will not stand India in good stead. Instead, he advocates a more robust and
confident attitude which will make the Chinese talk sensibly.
For his part, Mohan Guruswamy, chairman of the New Delhi-based Centre for Policy
Alternatives, asserts that a territorial swap is the only probable solution. He says India
should build domestic public opinion for swapping Aksai Chin for Arunachal Pradesh and
to "freeze the border as it is", and accordingly negotiate with the Chinese. He qualifies it
by saying though that the border row is not likely to be settled until political leadership
with overarching vision emerge in both countries. "The time was right even yesterday
but the people were wrong," Mr Guruswamy says, recalling how Deng Xiaoping made the
offer to Rajiv Gandhi and Jiang Zemin iterated it to Narasimha Rao but on both
occasions the Indian leaders said they could not persuade Parliament or build domestic
opinion for settlement of the border row on the basis of status quo. He cautions that
China itself is in the throes of an internal struggle. "The People's Liberation Army of
China is asserting itself, indicating a power struggle in China. The PLA is trying to force
things," he adds.
Eight rounds of border talks were held between 1981 and 1987 and another 14 Joint
Working Group meetings between 1988 and 2003, before both sides agreed to appoint
special representatives for raising the border talks to a political level. For their part, the
special representatives have held 13 rounds of talks, most recently in August 2009.
India says China is occupying 43,180 square kilometres of Jammu and Kashmir,
including 5,180 sq km ceded to Beijing by Islamabad under the Sino-Pakistan boundary
agreement of 1963. China, in turn, says India is in possession of some 90,000 sq km of
Chinese territory, mostly in Arunachal Pradesh. Beijing's stout denial of a Hong Kong-
based newspaper report which said last month that China could agree to swap eastern
sector of the border for the western sector, suggested that no immediate breakthrough
was likely.
No comments:
Post a Comment