Taming the dragon

Despite protestations to the contrary by mandarins in the ministry of external affairs, all is not well in relations between the two most populous countries in the world, India and China.

There have been a series of incidents along the India-China border, wherein Chinese troops have intruded into Indian territories and intimidated people living in border areas, most notably in Ladakh.

For the first time, frontline SU27 jets of the Chinese Air Force have violated Indian air space. This has been accompanied by growing evidence that after a gap of nearly three decades, China has resumed providing weapons and training to separatist insurgent groups from India’s north-eastern states like Manipur, Nagaland and Assam. Separatist leaders like Paresh Baruah of the ULFA and Isaac Swu of the NSCN (IM) have been welcomed in Beijing.

Coupled with the manner in which China has joined Pakistan in blocking attempts by the United States and others to get the United Nations Security Council to declare the Jamat-ud-Dawa (earlier calling itself the Lashkar-e-Taiba) as an international terrorist organisation and to  designate the head of the Jaish-e-Mohammed Maulana Masood Azhar as an international terrorist, China’s recent actions raise serious doubts about its long-term aims and ambitions.

While talks on resolving the border issue have continued after the visit of prime minister Rajiv Gandhi to China in December 1988, the problem of Chinese intrusions into our territory arises from the fact that while the Line of Control is defined and demarcated by mutual agreement between India and Pakistan in Jammu and Kashmir, the Line of Actual Control (LOAC), which both sides have pledged to determine and respect, along the China-India border, has never been demarcated.

It was decided that the issue of demarcation would be addressed by India and China exchanging maps about the precise location of the LOAC and reconciling differences through negotiations. But while maps were exchanged on the Central Sector (adjoining Uttarakhand) and India provided its maps on the LOAC in the western sector (Ladakh) to China in 2002, China refused to provide maps outlining its version of where the LOAC lies, either on the western sector (Ladakh) or the eastern sector (Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh). In the face of this impasse, it was decided in 2003 that the two countries would seek a “political solution”.

During the visit of Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao to India in 2005, China broadly agreed that in reaching a border settlement, there would be no change in the status of populated areas. But it now claims the entire state of Arunachal Pradesh and insists that it would expect territorial concessions in the populated eastern sector if it is to accommodate Indian claims in Ladakh. Because of the importance of Tawang as a Buddhist monastery town China seeks its control to secure a fig leaf of legitimacy for its rule in Tibet.

Tawang is the birthplace of the sixth Dalai Lama, revered by all Tibetans. India has rejected its claims. Pranab Mukherjee asserted: “Any elected Government in India is not permitted by our Constitution to part with any part of our land that sends representatives to the Indian Parliament”.

The entire problem of border intrusions today arises from the fact that China wishes to keep its options open by not spelling out where the LOAC lies so that it can continue to intrude and undermine public confidence in our border areas, in New Delhi’s will and ability to defend our territorial integrity. China still has disputes on its maritime boundaries with Japan, Vietnam, Indonesia, Philippines, Brunei and Malaysia and settles these only when a weakened neighbour succumbs to its pressures.

China does not hesitate to assert its presence across disputed boundaries with militarily weaker neighbours, like Japan, Philippines and Vietnam. In its efforts to “contain” India, China continues to provide nuclear and missile technology, fighter aircraft and frigates to Pakistan while seeking to undermine India’s relations with Nepal.

The Chinese respect national power and will only have any regard for India when our economic and military strength warrant it.

Sections of our media have resorted to hyperbole over recent Chinese actions because of the disinclination of the government to be forthcoming and transparent on recent developments. Actions speak louder than words. Rather that talking about how we propose to increase troop levels, or modernise our air defences along our borders with China, we should act to expeditiously strengthen defences and road communication networks along our borders.

Our response to Chinese provocations should be measured and taken only after very careful consideration. There should, however, also be a continuing dialogue with China, under agreements reached in 1993 and 1996, to reduce the possibility of any inadvertent escalation of tensions.