CHINA has a very clear stance about the sovereignty of its state and autonomous regions. Indeed, the South China Sea, Taiwan and Tibet are among the high sensitivities of the People’s Republic of China. About the autonomous region of Tibet, China maintained clear stance ever since 1951 that it is part of China? The officials’ stance of China over Tibet is: “For more than 700 years, the central government of China has continuously exercised sovereignty over Tibet and Tibet has never been an independent state. No government of any country has ever recognised Tibet as an independent state.” Nevertheless, owing to its own geographical vulnerabilities and may be because of its expansionist designs, India has pursued an unfriendly policy with China over this autonomous region of People’s Republic of China.
Demographically, Tibet, the homeland of Tibetans is the western-most part of East Asia, covering much of the Tibetan Plateau and spanning over an area of 970,000 square miles. Besides, it houses other ethnic groups such as: Monpa, Tamang, Qiang, Sherpa and Lhoba peoples and Han Chinese and Hui settlers. Though the region has been historically part of Chinese dynasties, yet it was formally annexed with the People’s Republic of China in 1951, after Communists won over the Nationalists. Thereafter, the entire plateau has been under the administration of the People’s Republic of China. To give more liberties and powers to its people, Tibet was declared an autonomous region by the People’s Republic of China in 1965. Located in the Himalayas, it is the highest region on Earth, with an average elevation of 4,380 metres.
For decades, India has been challenging Chinese sovereignty over Tibet for its own geopolitical vulnerabilities and as part of its expansionist designs. Despite maintaining enmity with China over Tibet, India recognized Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) as a part of China in 1954. In later years, India started collaborating with some groups of Tibet over territorial disputes with China. In 1959, India provided asylum to the Dalai Lama and many Tibetan refugees. This speaks of double standards of India on political and diplomatic levels. Since then, India has had intriguing problems in Tibet through its spying apparatus. Indeed, India is trying to destabilize China in many geographical and strategic areas, Tibet being the one key area. In this regard, it is collaborating with the United States and the West, the peer competitors of China in international politics.
In June 2024, US Congress passed a resolution on Tibet issue which states, “It is US policy that the dispute between Tibet and China remains unresolved in accordance with international law.” It empowers the Special Coordinator for Tibet to actively and directly counter disinformation about Tibet from the Chinese government and Communist Party. It says that China’s claim about Tibet is false and there should be dialogue between the Chinese Government and the Dalai Lama or his representatives for resolution of the issue. Thereafter, a US delegation visited Dharamshala, the disputed Indian state of Himachal Pradesh. This delegation emphasized; a) resolution to the Tibet-China Dispute Act, b) support Tibet and criticize China’s treatment of Tibetans and c) urge renewed talks between the Dalai Lama’s representatives and Beijing.
This all was done by the Indian Government under Modi as a new move against China. Indeed, the Indian Government formally hosted the delegation where the Indian External Affairs Minister hosted the dinner for a delegation including Tibetan nationals residing in India. The Indian Prime Minister also met with the US delegation. This all is against the recognized international norms. Indeed, it is a new beginning for promoting tension in the regional politics where India is being used as a tool. In 2020-21, India undertook a failed military adventure against China in the Ladakh region of India-occupied Kashmir. The results of this misadventure were humiliating and demeaning for both the Indian Army and the Indian nation.
Indian military escalations, after changing the status quo of occupied Jammu and Kashmir, invited Chinese wrath (in the form of military incursion) into East Ladakh from three key locations. The New York Times and BBC said at that time, the Indian military raid over a Chinese post resulted in the killing of over 20 troops which included the Commanding Officer of 16 Bihar Regiment (Infantry Battalion). After a military brawl with the Chinese Army where it lost its acclaimed territory and military men, India had surrendered to superior Chinese military might in the region. The political leadership of India under Prime Minister Modi and his domestically aggressive team has lost its credibility. India’s sudden change in its Tibet’s Policy is sparking debate as many struggle to understand it. One key reason is the BJP’s desire to divert attention from its recent poor performance in the general elections by creating a sensational geopolitical shift.
This new policy shift aims to overshadow the Indian Congress’s celebrations of a larger mandate in the 2024 elections, while signalling Modi’s readiness to confront China, even at the risk of provoking friction. Under BJP leadership, India is re-examining longstanding foreign policy endeavours, settled agreements and issues, marking a potentially risky trend. Recently, India has shown intentions to revisit the Katchatheevu island issue, which was settled and agreed upon with Sri Lanka. India is strategically involving the US in its political arena, signalling its capability and willingness to confront China on behalf of American interests. This move also aims to leverage US support for India’s bid to secure a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. India’s recent assertive stance towards China is more about pressuring China to settle the border dispute at the Line of Actual Control (LAC) and to rethink its support for Pakistan on Kashmir, rather than a true capability to confront China directly.
— The writer is Professor of Politics and IR at International Islamic University, Islamabad.
(drmkedu@gmail.com)
