Pranay Sharma is a senior journalist and a commentator on foreign policy issues in both print and audio-visual media. He is currently the executive editor of Hardnews, an English monthly magazine that comes out of New Delhi.
Singh's visit to Arunachal Pradesh had been known to the Chinese even before he went to Beijing in January. The Prime Minister managed to have a successful visit in China and also got the Chinese leadership to re-affirm its commitment to further strengthen and deepen the Strategic Partnership between the two sides.
Putting it in the proper context, the Chinese protest was also a low key affair. It was made by a junior official of its Foreign Ministry verbally. It was not serious enough to merit the summoning of the Indian ambassador to the foreign office in Beijing or to send a demarche to lodge the strong Chinese displeasure.
The Indians responded in kind as Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee repeated India's stated position of Arunachal Pradesh being a part of India but not much else to ensure the incident does not snowball into a controversy between the two sides.
Also Read: A Himalayan Blunder: How our maps ceded land to China
Two things emerge from the incident - one, that both sides are now trying to consolidate their respective position on areas they claim to be theirs, and two, India and China are now prepared for a long haul to settle their boundary disputes. But while doing so neither side is willing to allow it to come in the way of the overall improvement of their bilateral ties.
More than 1, 20,000 sq kms of land are in dispute between India and China. Most of it-nearly 84,000 sq kms that makes up the state of Arunachal Pradesh falls in the eastern sector and about 35,000 sq kms in the western sector, are the most contentious part of the boundary dispute. The remaining part that falls in the middle sector is the least contentious.
The Chinese believe Arunachal Pradesh to be the most important part of the boundary discussion not only because it involves the largest territory but since the border in this sector is defined by the McMohan Line. It became the official demarcation line in 1914 Shimla Agreement after it was accepted by the Tibetans and the British. But the Chinese had rejected it then and does so even now.
The Chinese aim at breaking the McMohan Line has two objectives. To correct a historical mistake deliberately made by the British imperialists and to legitimise its claim over Tibet. The thrust of its claim is on Tawang which constitutes only about 4000 sq kms of the entire state of Arunachal Pradesh. But if the Indians are willing to make suitable adjustments in the western sector, particularly by accepting only a part of Aksai Chin and not the entire plateau, then the Chinese might be satisfied with minor alterations in the eastern sector.
If China manages to convince India not to make McMohan Line the basis of the demarcation of the boundary in the eastern sector, then it would be seen as a major political victory for the Chinese leaders. It would end the notion of Tibet being a sovereign nation and thus being a legitimate party to the boundary negotiations. Since Tibet had accepted the McMohan Line in 1914 negotiations, it would weaken the Tibetan claim that it was an independent entity until 1959 when it was annexed by China.
Several rounds of talks between the ‘Special Representatives’ of the two countries have been held in the past four years, but there are no indications for an early resolution of the boundary dispute. In 2003 when the Vajpayee government was in power, the Chinese were hopeful of an early resolution of the boundary dispute. It continued to nurture such hopes for a few more years even after the Congress-led UPA coalition replaced the Vajpayee government. But the manner in which the Congress leadership has buckled under pressure from the left parties on the nuclear deal has raised serious doubts in Beijing whether the ruling coalition in India would be in a position to push for an early resolution on the boundary issue.
In the absence of any such hope China seems to have prepared for a long haul to find an amicable solution to redefine its borders with India. But it also acknowledges the growing importance of India and, therefore, would like to delink the border issue from the overall growth and improvement in bilateral ties. Meanwhile, one could expect further steps from the two sides to ensure peace and tranquility is maintained along the disputed borders.
By the same author: A dialogue that could redefine the future of the world | A democratic Pakistan is not a bad idea | Why the Left blinked on the N-deal
This suits the Indian leadership well as it is keen to ensure that it differences with China on the boundary issue does not go over the boil. In the past few months a series of high level visits from India, that includes one by UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi and another in January this year by the Prime Minister, have taken to China. Both Sonia and Manmohan Singh have tried to assure the Chinese that India is keen to develop its relations with China.
The bilateral trade between the two sides has been growing at a significant rate and soon it would reach $ 40 billions. There is immense potential for cooperation between the two sides on areas like energy security, information technology, infrastructure, and manufacturing sectors.
India has proposed a number of steps to turn its disputed boundary with China into a soft border by encouraging trade, religious pilgrimage, and freer movement of people. The Chinese have not yet responded officially to the Indian proposals. But there is a growing opinion in China that until the two sides are prepared to go for a final settlement of the boundary issue, it will also be in Beijing's interest to encourage a soft border between the two sides. Maintaining peace and tranquility along their disputed boundary lines is the best option that the two neighbours have at the moment.
The views expressed in the article are the author's and not of Sify.com.
