The Hindu : New methodology to address boundary issue

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, Jun 26, 2003

International

International - India & World

New methodology to address boundary issue

By Amit Baruah

The Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee, with the Governor of Henan Province in China, Li Chengyu, during a visit to the Longmen caves in Luoyang on Wednesday. — AP

SHANGHAI June 25. New possibilities have opened up in the India-China relationship with the two countries agreeing to "accommodate" the other on Sikkim and Tibet.

In the case of Tibet, the Indian position revolves round the play of words, which, the Chinese feel, is quite important. In return, border trade will open between Sikkim and Tibet. For the Chinese, Tibet has long been an important and, perhaps, the "core" issue in its dealings with India.

While the Indian side has clarified that the latest formulation will not have any impact on the Dalai Lama staying in Dharmsala, every Indian and Chinese joint statement has had New Delhi saying that it will not permit hostile activities by Tibetan exiles. Beyond Sikkim and China, the appointment of "political" special representatives to "explore" a new methodology to address the boundary dispute is a clear sign that the Chinese leadership feels it can do business with India. And, hopefully, resolve this intractable issue in the long-term.

On June 23, the official Chinese People's Daily wrote on India-China relations: "The greatest obstacle to the further development of Sino-Indian relationship is lack of adequate mutual confidence." Now, perhaps, some doses of "confidence" have been injected.

On Tuesday, the External Affairs Minister, Yashwant Sinha, made it clear that the Joint Working Group and the Expert Group working to clarify the Line of Actual Control would continue to do their work. A more "high-level" political, parallel track would, however, work apace.

Mr. Vajpayee has put behind him the ghost of his "famous" letter that he wrote to the then American President, Bill Clinton, soon after the May 1998 nuclear tests. The fact that the Chinese responded immediately to the Prime Minister's proposal to set up "special representatives" shows that they are serious in addressing outstanding disputes with India.

Mr. Sinha, asked whether the Chinese would formally recognise Sikkim, said: "I have reasons to believe that more steps will follow". In an informal interaction, Chinese officials in New Delhi had pointed out before the Vajpayee visit that they, too, had a problem in "selling" any change in stance on Sikkim to their people, especially since Sikkim was shown as an "independent kingdom" in their maps.

But, as Indian officials pointed out, the memorandum on expanding border trade had a clause that read, "Desirous of opening another pass on the India-China border..."

So, trade with Sikkim will, the Chinese have recognised, be through the "India-China" border. On Tibet, India has for the first time used the Chinese description the "Tibet Autonomous Region" being part of the territory of the People's Republic of China. The TAR is a Chinese entity and India has used its official title. In 1988, India "reiterated" its long-standing and consistent policy that Tibet was an autonomous region of China.

While there is no argument that India has conceded for decades that Tibet is part of China, John W. Garver, in his book "Protracted Contest", says about the 1988 formulation: "The use of the phrase autonomus region reminded Beijing of the promise it had made (as New Delhi understood it) in 1954-57, when India endorsed China's ownership of Tibet."

From the Indian standpoint, the fact of the matter is that Tibet is a part of Chinese territory and nothing can be done to alter that situation by India.

So, if India can allay Chinese fears and build up mutual confidence by the latest formulation in the declaration issued on Tuesday, then this can only be welcomed.

Some might argue that in return for the formulation on Tibet, a formal recognition for Sikkim as part of India should have come simultaneously.

But, the Chinese for their own reasons, have indicated that this will follow while conceding in the border trade memorandum that trade will flow through the "India-China border".

There is a need to look beyond Tibet and Sikkim and hope the equation established over the last couple of days in Beijing will be a long-term, solid one with neither country being motivated by the theory of "loss and gain" but being guided by one principle: that they must resolve their boundary dispute once and for all in the not-so-distant future.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

International