The Chinese Foreign Ministry released a position paper on Wednesday laying out the “facts” in relation to the six week-old standoff with India in the Sikkim border region.
In a nutshell, the document – supported by maps and photographs – recounts that, on June 18, 270 Indian troops, driving two bulldozers, crossed the international border with China at the Doka La mountain pass to obstruct road-building on the Chinese side.
They pitched tents there and refused to withdraw despite repeated Chinese demands at various levels. The document alleges that:
- Indian forces illegally crossed into Chinese territory in an area where there is a “clear and delimited boundary,” in an attempt to “change the status quo of the boundary.” This undermines the peace and tranquility of the border area and runs counter to international law and the relevant UN guidelines on the inadmissibility of “invasion or attack” on the territory of another country.
- Indian border troops have been obstructing Chinese border patrols in recent years and have attempted to build border installations across the boundary “time and again” with a view to changing “the status quo of the China-India boundary” in the Sikkim sector, thus posing a “grave security threat” to China.
What could be the motivation in bringing out such a document? First and foremost, China hopes to influence international opinion – and embarrass India.
Secondly, China reiterates that on the question of territorial sovereignty there can be no compromise and Indian forces must unconditionally withdraw. The document takes note that the Indian forces have thinned out from a peak strength of 400 troops to 40 as of end-July. Has India withdrawn its troops or is it only a partial drawdown? There has been no word from the Indian side.
In fact, China is poking New Delhi to say something – anything. So far it has been evasive.
New Delhi faces a quandary. If an Indian withdrawal has taken place or a drawdown is under way, the government’s core constituency of ultra-nationalists who have been seeking revenge for defeat in the 1962 war will feel let down. They were demanding a “short, intense war” in which the Indian Army gave the PLA a bloody nose.
On the other hand, the Chinese document signals that something has to give way soon and Beijing will not compromise on its demand for an unconditional, immediate Indian troop withdrawal. New Delhi cannot ignore the implicit warning.
The document suggests that it will be in the “fundamental interests” of the two countries that the Indian government orders a thorough investigation into the entire episode – hinting that some interest groups within the Indian establishment might have deliberately precipitated the crisis.
Clearly, Beijing has drawn some firm conclusions. A recent visit by India’s National Security Advisor, Ajit Doval, apparently cut no ice.
However, the bottom line is about the China-Bhutan-India triangle. The document states that China and Bhutan have conducted joint surveys in the border area and have reached a “basic consensus on the actual state of the border area and the alignment of their boundary.” All that remains is the formal delimitation of the border.
In a sharply-worded passage, the Chinese document states: “The China-Bhutan boundary issue is one between China and Bhutan. It has nothing to do with India. As a third party, India has no right to interfere in or impede the boundary talks between China and Bhutan, still less the right to make territorial claims on Bhutan’s behalf. India’s intrusion into the Chinese territory under the pretext of Bhutan has not only violated China’s territorial sovereignty but also challenged Bhutan’s sovereignty and independence… China will continue to work with Bhutan to resolve the boundary issue between the two countries through negotiations and consultations in the absence of external interference.”
Arguably, the overall tone is chastising of India for its lack of maturity or foresight. Make no mistake, however, that the gauntlet has been thrown at India over its ties with Bhutan
The above passage exudes an extraordinary degree of confidence that there is a mutual desire in Beijing and Thimpu to develop bilateral relations. Of course, Beijing rejects any notion of Bhutan being an Indian protectorate.
Interestingly, Bhutan’s ambassador to India, Vetsop Namgyel, attended an event at the Chinese embassy in New Delhi on Tuesday to mark the 90th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Liberation Army – although Bhutan does not have diplomatic ties with China and it is rare for an ambassador to attend an armed forces day in a foreign embassy. A subtle signal of Bhutanese goodwill to China was unmistakable.
Bhutan has not said a word so far to the effect that it ever sought an Indian military intervention at Doklam or had prior knowledge of the Indian troops appearing on the Bhutan-China border. Thimpu perhaps decided that actions speak louder than words, as the Bhutanese ambassador’s presence at the Chinese embassy reception testifies.
All in all, the good part is that the dogs of war are still on leash. The Chinese document shows no trace of real belligerence. The intention seems to be to ensure that India draws down its remaining 40 troops at Doklam. Arguably, the overall tone is chastising of India for its lack of maturity or foresight. Make no mistake, however, that the gauntlet has been thrown at India over its ties with Bhutan. New Delhi has been left guessing about the state of play of China-Bhutan dialogue. And that could be the single most far-reaching outcome of the standoff at Sikkim.
Interesting
Besides the Bhutanese ambassador visiting the Chinese embassy, the wife of the Chinese ambassador flew to Thimphu & met, among others, the Queen Mother. Hence, China has been playing a shrewd game with a view to corner India. Indian troops entered the Doklam area fully aware that it was Bhutanese territory & were merely helping the Bhutanese from being bullied by Chinese troops. One must note here that Bhutan goes to polls next year & China is keen on buttressing the profile of their apologists in Thimphu. China is keen to have diplomatic relations with Bhutan & steadily loosen India’s grip over Bhutan. India would do well to address some of Thimphu’s grievances, particularly on the hydropower projects, lest Bhutan goes Nepal’s way. China’s strident posturing is part of its psychological war of belittling India in the eyes of the world & painting India as villains. India might well have scaled down their troop levels at the standoff point but is unlikely to withdraw without a tangible quid pro quo, provided Thimphu stands by India. India is standing firm presumably since it holds topographical advantage in the region vis a vis China. China, too, has scaled down their presence but is unlikely to withdraw, at least until the quinquennial Communist Congress ends in November by which time it will be winter & movement in this area would be difficult. It has now turned into a battle of attrition.
Actually we need one tsrongchen Gompo to solve the problem. Who was the real king of Tibet ,Bhutan and northern part of Himalaya upto Mongolia. Chinese king bowed down before him and presented his daughter to Gompo in fear. Chinese king agreed to pay tax to him. So Chinese are intruders of this region. They have no legal right as well as no moral right to capture the land of Bhutan. They should left Tibet to Tibetans.
Samiul Huq,you should read Gita & Veda.Then you understand what divine power hiding in Hindutva.
Has the writer of this article , Mr Bhadrakumar ,visited and surveyed the Doka La area ?
His article says around 250 Indian troops crossed over the border and stopped the road construction undertaken by the Chinese.
Since , the actual border hasn’t been delinieated there in Doka La region, how can anyone infer as to who has crossed over?
If the area is disputed, then why China is building a military class road right up to Bhutan border and on what intention?
There is no diplomatic ties with Bhutan nor border trade. So why does China need to build road infrastructure right up to Bhutan border, when their is no normal trade and transport movement occuring between the two nations.
From the Doka La border, the capital of Bhutan is mere few hours drive whereas, Beijing is thousands of miles away.
This very act of China building military infrastructure right on the border doesn’t reflect a defensive posture. India or Bhutan will never transgress or attack China as the region is mountainous and harsh. China knows that, but still massive military buildup and infrastructure for military has been developed in the region and that would definitely concern Bhutan and India. With China’s rise as an economic and military power, recent territorial claims over SCS and other regions , doesn’t reflect maturity and understanding of a growing super power. Brushing aside the Hague ruling and threatening the neighbouring nations of war shows China’s hegemonic and imperialistic nature which is not conducive in the current world order.
With great power comes great responsibilities and compassion.
Thank you Tony for elobrating the whole situation .
What the hell, Are u mad? That time,India was ruled by British for more than 200 years. Not Bhutan.
Over a period of time the world is seeing these irresponsible acts by the Chinese. China’s standoff with the Philippines over the disputed Scarborough Shoal is well documented. It is having a problem with Japan over the Diaoyu/Senkaku islands. South China Sea is always simmering.
Before there is a military stand off there always is a diplomatic stand off. It is well established that force is used when diplomacy to enforce one’s will fails. Let us examine the present Sino-Indian face off from India’s point of view.
China must realise that India has no territorial or maritime designs. No territory which is in the boundary of China has ever been claimed by India from the time India attained independence. The Chinese have always contested territory which was either in the physical occupation of India or territory which is ‘disputed’ and is not physically ‘occupied’ by either country. It is China which claims territory which it says was ‘inherited’ by India from the British. At no stage has India claimed any territory of any nation from the time of its independence.
China should desist from its oft repeated reminder of ‘teaching a lesson to India as it did in 1962’. For that matter should India remind China of the Nanking lesson, the Korean lesson,the Ussuri River clash, the Sino-Indian 1967 clash, the Vietnamese lesson of 1979 ? It serves no purpose. China may be a powerful nation but India too is not what it was in 1962. Remember how Mao had once said during the height of the cold war, ‘ even if a few million Chinese are killed, China will survive’. Does it apply to both India and China today??
China is still in illegal occupation of certain territory (Aksai Chin area) which it captured and consolidated when it ‘taught India a lesson’ in 1962. Till the 1962 war, this was never a part of China.
See the unreasonable attitude of China. It objects to any economic, construction related or physical and naval activity in certain regions of the South/East China Sea’s, calling it ‘disputed territory’ — by the same merit the Pakistan occupied part of Kashmir is ‘disputed territory’, but China undertakes construction activity there !
China accepted certain part of territory of J&K from Pakistan. This territory was illegally occupied by Pakistan and actually belongs to India. So, as per Chinese viewpoint, hasn’t this territory to be returned to India one day? And how can a road be made by China in territory which belongs to India? Or is ‘disputed’??
These are many ‘Area’s of Differing Perceptions’ as was agreed. Now China is getting paranoid and is feeling threatened for no reason and trying to create incidents where there should be none. These are areas where all sides had agreed to maintain the status quo. What are the Chinese intentions? The exact place where the Chinese intrusion has taken place is Bhutanese territory. How come there was no problem before? Even if there was a problem, it had been agreed that a solution would be found with negotiations. Were there Chinese troops there 3/4 months back–one year back, 10 years back?
It is immature on part of Chinese ‘Think Tanks’ and leaders to raise the issue of Sikkim or Arunachal Pradesh or of coming to the ‘assistance’ of Pakistan in J&K. Should India raise the issue of the independence of Tibet and Xinjiang?? Should the Khampa’s be resurrected?? Should India offer to mediate in China’s disputes with Vietnam or Japan or Phillipines or Malaysia or Tibet??
10 Finally , if China decides to start a war — who will win?? No one. A lot of soldiers will get killed. A lot of infrastructure along the border, and in TAR will be destroyed. Dams, bridges, railway lines, tunnels on both sides will be targeted. The Indians will also use their AirForce and so will the Chinese. At some places the Chinese will capture some territory and in some places the Indians will capture some territory. Having more numbers in terms of troops, tanks, artillery and planes does not matter if the opponents military strategy is good. The enemy can only apply ‘as much’, in a battle at one time. Rest are a threat in being and are good for a prolonged or ‘total’ war lasting a couple of years. Not likely in the present context. Both nations will do missile and nuclear rattling, both will say ‘we will not be the first to use nuclear weapons’. The UN will go into over drive. American, Australian, Japanese, Phillipine and Vietnamese ships will finally have unrestricted access to the China Sea’s. Chinese and Indian navies will clash in the Indian Ocean. There will be mistrust between India and China for the next thirty years after the war. At every forum, the two Countries will try and destroy each other diplomatically and economically. The so called ‘Belt’ will finish once for all and so will the economic corridor.
War is definitely not a good option for both countries.
China should understand that it has to stop Regional hegemony.Its still vulnerable state with no democracy.USSR is a stark example how it was wiped out after it got too agressive.India looks weak but base is strong as Democracy saves from Disasters.China does not hv that safety cushion.Is it beginning of end of China story ?
Wars and battles are also humane nature. In the last 3400 years history expert says that there was only 250 years of peace, which had really no conflicts in the world. some have even different view they say only 26 days were of peace. Therefore let’s have no war ! but who listens?
Bhutanese Deities are Powerful.
Don’t forget that Bhutan is only the Country to flush out Terrorist in one day.
Don’t Disturb The Sleeping Deity
Silence is golden.
Luca Taramelli read and spoil his wet dream?
It is obvious Bhutan can’t say publicly that it had not requested India’s involvement in this fiasco because New Delhi would hurt them real bad and consequently dent their reputation of being the happiest folks on earth.. Must be the type of weed grown over there.
I think Bhutan played the big boys pretty well this time. Haha.
great power come with great responsibility. Which is missing in case of bully china. Look at all neighbours ,all set on fire and have boundary issue with expanding nd hungry china. No country can bcm world leader with its neighbours against it. First set house nd surroundings in order thn go for winning the world.
Inndia annexed Assam ( Naga land ) immediately after being freed fromBritish colonialism. The Assam people had filed an application to UN to be recognised as a sovereign state right after WW2. In 1975 India invaded and colonised Sikkim. As for Nepal, it is practically an Indian colony, with all the typical corrupt civil service and polution despites its original natural beauty. And now the Himalayas paradise of Bhutan is at risk to be the next Indian prize.
Indian are post fact.
Malvika Sharma Nice try. It were even true, you are Comparing a culture of drinlking cow pee, to a insane man. May be your culture is insane.
Vijay Raghavan I see you are off med again. Your country deserve more of you.