POLITICAL DIARY

New Delhi, 2 February 2008

PM Pussyfoots On Arunachal

  WHY ARE WE SCARED OF CHINA?

By Poonam I Kaushish

It was dubbed as an important visit. All eyes were on him. But, he pussy footed when the need of the hour was assertion. So, he came, he saw but failed to conquer! This encapsulates, Manmohan Singh’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh, the first of an Indian Prime Minister in 12 years. Importantly, his visit left more questions than it answered. Raising a moot point: Why are we scared of China?

Undeniably, Manmohan Singh owes the country an explanation as to why he omitted Tawang from his itinerary. Specially against the backdrop of Beijing laying claims on it repeatedly. Remember, the Chinese Ambassador to New Delhi, Sun Yuxi’s TV interview, claiming “the whole of Arunachal Pradesh including Tawang as Chinese territory” and demanding that India agree to “mutual compromises” and “some give and take in 2006.” Tawang is militarily important as it is the critical corridor between Lhasa and the Assam Valley. Besides, it has a symbolic and historic significance as several Indian soldiers laid down their lives there during the 1962 war with China.

Instead of using his visit to clear the air, the Prime Minister emitted wrong signals, notwithstanding his poetic description of Arunachal as, "The sun kisses India first in Arunachal Pradesh. It is our land of the rising sun.” Thus, losing a good opportunity to put Beijing on notice about its claim on Arunachal and assert unequivocally that Arunachal was, is and will continue to be a part of India.

Even as South Block mandarins would have us believe that it was a deliberate ploy not to provoke China and allow the boundary question to eclipse the meeting ground between the two on various CBMs in place, regional and global issues. Sadly, New Delhi failed to realize that poetic descriptions don’t add up to good politics. A cold reality check exposes the much-awaited visit as nothing more than a touch-talk-timid dampener. New Delhi played into the Chinese hands thanks to poor tactics and allowed itself to be outmaneuvered.

The end result? Beijing is now pursuing an aggressive foreign policy. Within days of the Prime Minister’s return from a “successful, historic, path-breaking, warm, great body language visit” to Beijing last month, China stumped India by lodging a diplomatic protest over Indian military activity in Sikkim. It is claiming that Indian troops are trying to be active on the Chinese side of the Line of Actual Control (LAC) and building structures along the LAC and the Indo-Bhutan border.

The reopening of claims, particularly on the Sikkim border, has taken New Delhi by surprise. China may have ceased to depict Sikkim as an independent country in its maps, but the important point, often overlooked, is that it has yet to expressly acknowledge that Sikkim is part of India. Beijing has declined to affirm that Sikkim is part of the Republic of India.

Further, in the last 24 months, China has made over 300 military incursions across the LAC (more than three a week), specially in Arunachal Pradesh. Only a month back, the Chinese demolished some Indian forward posts and bunkers near Doka La on the Bhutan-Sikkim-Tibet tri-junction and a Buddha statue near Tawang. 

New Delhi thus should be wary. As it stands, Beijing has built a township across the border in the State. Given the ethnic and cultural affinity, the bustling township beckons the poor Arunachalis to partake the Chinese Las Vegas. It is pertinent to recall that when the former Arunachal Pradesh Chief Minister, Gegong Apang applied for a visa to visit China as a member of an Indian delegation, Beijing said no visa was needed for its own citizens!

Equally worrisome is the Chinese capability to rapidly deploy forces against India by expanding its infrastructure in Tibet significantly, by building roads right up to the LAC and extending the new railway line to Lhasa southwards. Also, space photos dished out by Google three years ago show China having built simulation centres at Huangyangtan, near the Great Wall in Nignxia province, to target Indian military installations in Jammu & Kashmir.

Clearly, Beijing’s actions belie the bonhomie claimed by India. The problem is that while the Chinese are pragmatic, most Indian leaders are too sentimental. A bhai-bhai policy is so much more romantic than a firm stand! Today, even as New Delhi repeats that it is 'happy with the progress of the talks', Beijing keeps intruding into Arunachal and South Block looks the other way so as not to jeopardise the 'negotiations'.

Thus, a mutually satisfactory breakthrough on the boundary dispute looks nowhere in sight. Once in a while India claims that China is illegally occupying 43,180 sq km of J&K, including 5,180 sq km illegally ceded to Beijing by Islamabad. China accuses India of possessing some 90,000 sq km of its territory, mostly in Arunachal Pradesh.  Arguably, what is India’s final goal? Is it ready to give away part of its territory which has been illegally occupied by China?

It is all very well for President Jintao and Wen Jibao to assert that China was ready to work with India to “actively seek a fair, just and mutually-acceptable solution through friendly consultation on an equal footing ….and the boundary issue will be converted into a bond of good-neighbourliness and mutually-beneficial cooperation”. However, the wily and inscrutable Chinese have not budged an inch from their stated positions on two critical issues, which form the core of the fragile Sino-Indian ties since the 1962 war. Till date, New Delhi has failed to get Beijing to either present maps of their version of the LAC, which have been promised since 2001 or fortification of its borders on the Tibet plateau.

Why? It is busy building a railway link to Lhasa which will improve its capacity in case of a conflict with India. But Beijing asserts: “This is only to strengthen our borders.”  Against whom? Is this any different from the massive building of roads during the 1950s to liberate Tibet? With Beijing remaining mum, how can New Delhi hold any substantive discussions? Are these attempts to simply lull us into complacency, like in 1962, while they strengthen their military capability across the border and in Tibet?

New Delhi must be both alert and assertive. A first step to a settlement of any dispute is clarity on the LAC or at least appreciation of the “no go” areas so that provocative or unfriendly actions can be eschewed. Exchanging maps showing each other’s military positions, without prejudice to rival territorial claims, is a preliminary step to first define, then delineate and finally demarcate a frontline. Beijing’s disinclination to trade maps underlines its aversion to clinch an overall border settlement or even to remove the ambiguities plaguing the long, rugged LAC.

Clearly, we seem to be stuck in a limbo notwithstanding the ‘contentless’ Vision Statement For the 21st Century” (sic) encapsulating a fair, reasonable and mutually acceptable solution of the border dispute on the basis of the political parameters of 2005. China has reportedly backtracked on the understanding that any settlement should not involve exchange of populated areas. Two, China is non-committal on supporting the lifting of restrictions by the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group against New Delhi. It fears that with India being the only country in Asia that has the potential to match and surpass it, Beijing cannot afford to risk its monopoly.  

So, all that Manmohan Singh and his Government is likely to get are sweet nothings and vague promises from the Chinese. In exchange, the Chinese leadership will expect substantive and painful concessions from the Indian side, such as the handing over of Tawang. Tragically, as always, New Delhi has squandered a good opportunity to put across its point of view effectively and derive strategic benefits crucial for its defence and in geo-strategic political terms.

Both in Beijing and Arunachal Manmohan Singh, like his predecessors, has fallen a victim to the great Indian failure of seeking convenient compromises for cheap populist applause. Failing to realize that the supposedly hard talk of no shifting of borders and population interspersed with sweet talk of brotherhood etc is meaningless. What counts are agreed conclusions and future agenda on basic issues. In this case --- border.

Clearly, New Delhi needs to fashion a more result-oriented, real politik strategy. It’s high time that South Block injected realism by shedding deluding platitudes and misplaced bonhomie and placed a premium on substance and leveraged diplomacy. With Beijing we need to be clear on our national interests and should doggedly pursue them. Stop being scared of China. ---- INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)