A ‘Frozen’ Conflict

India-China bilateral relationship is again getting currency because the persons in power, barring Prime Minister Modi, of course, are expressing their concerns in no uncertain terms about this more than six decades-old frozen conflict in the Himalayas. There is nothing new in India’s strained relations with China and New Delhi’s official response to the Chinese stance. What started in 1962 as a hot war was transformed into a cold war immediately after the cessation of hostilities along the disputed border or what they call the Line of Actual Control [LAC]. Both sides have been duelling over the disputed boundary since then without showing any sincerity to get rid of the crisis once and for all. While participating in a discussion at the Geneva Centre for Security Policy, India’s External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar admitted that ‘the relationship between the two countries is very complex’. It’s one way to bypass the issue and talk vaguely to suppress the ground reality. He also emphasised on peace along the border for normal ties. In other words his indirect admittance that the India-China relationship is abnormal despite the fact that billionaires on both sides of the ‘shifting fence’ are too eager to do trade. In truth, India and America are two largest importers of Chinese goods.

Not that they are not conducting military-level talks, rather ‘disengagement’ talks, but the end result is zero. It’s more like an arrangement to buy breathing space for engagement, not disengagement. They have been discussing the ‘disengagement’ process without really creating any conducive atmosphere for withdrawal of troops to their original positions. So after each military-level parley, it is business as usual.

Meanwhile, against the backdrop of the border stand-off with China, the leader of Opposition in Parliament Rahul Gandhi said ‘Prime Minister Modi has not handled the situation well’. He has gone to the extent of accusing Modi of allowing China to occupy land the size of Delhi in Ladakh. But China still thinks they have not yet been able to reclaim the territory they have been claiming since 1962. As so many rounds of military-level negotiations have failed to resolve the dispute, they seem to have decided to regain their control by pushing the LAC to their advantage, sometimes resulting in losses of lives. After all, LAC is not the permanent and settled boundary; it varies according to each one’s own perception.

For one thing Modi never criticised China in public for its alleged forward policy. On the contrary, he assured the Nation that his government didn’t concede any Indian parcel of land to China. This bitter legacy left by history cannot be erased so easily. However, Rahul Gandhi didn’t utter a word or two about why successive Congress regimes failed to clinch a deal with China.

So long as Tibet was Tibet there was no border problem. Indians and Tibetans used to move freely without bothering about un-demarcated ‘international border’. It all started when Tibet became an integral part of China, with the huge incursion of Chinese troops in Tibet and the destruction of Tibet’s semi-independent status which it used to enjoy before communists took power in Beijing.

Two parallel lines never meet. China has not budged an inch from its stated stand on the disputed territory since 1962. They are unlikely to change their position in the foreseeable future. China has repeatedly challenged India’s sovereignty over Arunachal or what was actually NEFA during the British period.

Interestingly enough, media persons in India never sought the Dalai Lama’s opinion on the Indo-Tibet border question. Nor did they disturb the functionaries in the Tibetan government in exile, based in Shimla on this thorny issue. Then there is a large number of Tibetans living as refugees in different parts of India. It is not known how they appreciate India’s efforts to define or redefine Tibet’s boundary. Rahul Gandhi’s veiled anti-China rhetoric is in reality aimed at playing with the gallery.

Back to Home Page

Frontier
Vol 57, No. 14, Sep 29 - Oct 5, 2024