The latest Chinese infiltration in ladakh, even if the issue has been ‘successfully' resolved by both diplomacies, will remain for years a scar on the Sino-Indian relations
Hua Chunying, the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, was at her elusive best when she announced ‘progress’ in the Sino-Indian ‘stand-off’ in ladakh: “So far as I know, relevant departments of the two countries have made positive progress in their friendly consultations”, she stated
According to Xinhua, she said, “I believe that both sides have the will and capability to properly resolve this incident as soon as possible and jointly maintain the healthy and stable growth of China-India relations.” The ‘will to resolve’ the issue clearly means that it is not solved. Even if the troops’ withdrawal remains shrouded in vagueness, it is important to take an initial trial balance of the incident in the High Himalayas. A first point to be noticed: New Delhi was taken by surprise; was not ready to tackle the situation, whether militarily or even diplomatically.
There is no doubt that the terrain favours China; after months of being posted in Western Tibet, Chinese jawans and officers are usually well acclimatised and it is relatively easy for them to go on an outing, like at Daulat Beg Oldi.
In his memoirs, Colonel Chewang Rinchen, the brave ladakhi soldier who was twice awarded the Maha Vir Chakra (in 1948 and 1971) for his exploits in the region, recounts: “The entire area between Murgo, which is known as ‘Gateway to Hell’, and DBO is notorious for treacherous weather and snow blizzards. …After crossing Saser la, we proceeded towards DBO. On the way, we came across skeletons of human beings and animals lying scattered all along the track.” Interestingly, he added, “On September 3, 1961, I proceeded with a patrol party, along the Chip Chap river… I noted the hoof marks of camels and horses and, a little further, tyre marks of a three-ton vehicle. It clearly indicated the possible presence of the Chinese in that area.”
While the toughest soldiers of the Indian Army took more than a week to reached DBO, the Chinese could drive in a three-tonner! And that was in 1961. The topography and the difficulty to survive in the area was obviously known to the Indian Army and intelligence agencies, but they did not envisage that the Chinese would plant tents in what Beijing considers to be its side of the line of Actual Control.
From the Chinese side, everything seemed to have been programmed to the minutest details, including the ‘withdrawal’ — if withdrawal it really is.
For future bilateral relations, one worrying issue is that China is ready to break formal treaties or agreements when it suits its interests. On September 7, 1993, India and China signed an ‘Agreement on the Maintenance of Peace and Tranquility along the line of Actual Control in the India-China Border Areas’. Amongst other things, the agreement stipulated: “Neither side shall use or threaten to use force against the other by any means. Pending an ultimate solution to the boundary question between the two countries, the two sides shall strictly respect and observe the line of actual control between the two sides. No activities of either side shall overstep the line of actual control.” The DBO episode is clearly a breach of the 1993 agreement. Delhi should remember this.
India has discovered that, while it has many experts on China, so far nobody has been able to explain why Beijing took the risk of provoking a clash at this particular point in time. If China had some grievance against India (which may or may not be valid), it could have first taken the issue up at one of the scheduled bilateral meetings (Mr Salman Khurshid in Beijing or Mr li Keqiang in Delhi). A visit of Mr AK Antony to China is also planned for later this year. There were at least three forthcoming occasions to resolve pending issues and make ‘positive progress’.
By the way, did you notice that China had only one speaker for the issueIJ The Central Military Commission, the PlA, the State Council, the Party — all kept quiet. Apart from the spokeswoman, the websites of The PlA Daily, The People's Daily, The Global Times, etc remained extremely discreet.
Interestingly, some experts in India seem to regret the Indian ‘open’ system. The Global Times in one rare comment said: “Some Indian officials caution that China should pay no heed to the radical voices among some Indian media which sensationalise news.”
Still, living in an open society does not mean that the Indian public is well-informed. In fact, it appears that even ‘experts’ are abysmally lacking in the basic understanding of the situation on the ground, particularly the respective claims of both India and China. The present incident and the subsequent flurry of articles/programmes may help the general public to understand better the actual stakes. It is time that the Government of India starts publishing White Papers like it had done between 1959 and 1965 (15 White Papers disclosed the correspondence between Delhi and Beijing on the border issue).
China is bound to object, but India does not need to follow Beijing’s diktat when those go against New Delhi’s professed principles of transparency and openness. If India has a case — and I believe that it has a strong one — it should be known to and understood by the common man.
Now, what has China gained from its DBO excursionIJ Many theories have been propounded: Some say that the Chinese leadership wanted to show its displeasure on the new proximity between New Delhi and Tokyo. But such Himalayan happenings are bound to draw the US, Japan and India closer, not the other way around.
What about China’s displeasure at the infrastructure that India has been building on this side of the lACIJ Was it worth this dramaIJ Was it not possible to discuss this issue at the already scheduled ministerial meetsIJ ‘Experts’ will argue that according to the Art of War, it is the Chinese way to get what they want. This is not certain, because the issue has serious negative collaterals for Beijing. This incident, even if it has been ‘successfully’ resolved by both diplomacies, will remain for years a scar on the Sino-Indian relations which had just started to look up.
When Chinese scholars visit India, they like to say that both countries should sincerely work on the mutual trust deficit. It is clear the Chinese ‘camping’ in DBO has pushed back for years the earlier progress in closing the ‘trust’ gap.
A last issue: Since he came on the Middle Kingdom’s throne, the new Emperor has proclaimed the Great Dream of China: “The China Dream will bring blessings and goodness to not only the Chinese people but also people in other countries.”
Where do the last intrusions fit in the Chinese DreamIJ It is clear from the recent development that President Xi Jinping’s pet slogan has taken a beating in the process. But there is always the possibility that the stand-off has made some PlA Generals dream, and this without the blessings of the Emperor. Who knowsIJ