Rapprochement a Distant Prospect
Although Delhi has been eager to settle the boundary issue in order, in its words, to build trust between itself and Beijing, the reality is that the question is unlikely to be resolved unless there’s already trust between the two sides. Chinese suspicions over the Indian approach to the ‘Free Tibet’ movement, in addition to Indian anger at the nuclear and missile assistance given by China to Pakistan, are likely to continue to combine in a way that stamps out any hope that India will follow Russia in arriving at a rapprochement with China.
Beijing’s price for a border settlement and for normalisation of ties with India, meanwhile, is transparent if unexpressed–that India dismantle the Tibetan settlement in Dharamshala and request the Dalai Lama take up residence in another country. Within South Asia, India is now the only country that has placed the interests of the Tibetan diaspora above the desirability of better ties with China. Every other SAARC member, the latest being Nepal in 2008, has shut the door on those seeking a ‘free’ Tibet, if not in law, then in reality.
Meanwhile, the question of what will happen to the substantial Tibetan presence in India after the present Dalai Lama passes on has not been answered. For countries with a stake in ensuring that China be kept off-balance, it is immensely convenient to have Delhi pick up the geopolitical cost of backing the Dalai Lama, while the benefits flow to other countries. As for Tibetans in Tibet, the departure of the Dalai Lama has left them leaderless. Since the 1950s, Tibet has been in the process of being ‘Sinicized’ — so much so that in the next 40 years, less than a tenth of the population is expected to show any form of deference to the Lama system that has been the traditional way of governance in Tibet.
It is, of course, still possible that the question of Tibetan settlements could become a significant part of the basket of issues that will drive negotiations between India and China. The United States and the EU are fulsome in their praise (if largely in private) of India’s idealism and boldness in ‘standing up to China.’ This has led some policymakers in Delhi to express the view that if India followed the precedent of other South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation countries, it would exact a big toll in terms of frostier relations with the US and the EU, not to mention Canada and Australia.
But the reality is that the China-oriented stance taken by Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and now Nepal have not made any difference in the texture of their relations with these countries, each of whom is individually attempting to ensure a cooperative relationship with Beijing. Unlike in the case of India-Pakistan relations, where both the US and EU have sought to interject themselves at frequent intervals, Western nations have typically steered clear of Sino-Indian issues — particularly those involving the Tibetan community resident in India.
And, with the Dalai Lama’s latest visit likely to have further enhanced the hold he has over the population of that Indian state, there’s no sign of these decades-standing tensions easing any time soon.
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Michael
“Nehru and his team were mere quislings who pretended to be independent but were actually bound almost as firmly to the apron strings of Europe and the United States as they were when still a colony”
And the truth shall set you free! The truth is that India never was given complete freedom and independence from their colonial masters, simply a little more management duties! Don’t Indians ever question why the most powerful person in India today is an FOREIGN WHITE ITALIAN WOMAN whose only connection to India is her late husbands last name of Gandhi??? Do you see any where else in this world, be it Afica, South America, the Middle East, or Asia where there is a White person running the government??? India is still a slave country and nothing will change this fact!
Rishabh
India is a secular democracy and the “foreign white Italian lady” is not Italian anymore, she is a naturalized Indian citizen. And as an Indian citizen she has the rights to contest elections, exactly as Arnie did in California, even though he was Austrian by birth. We dont all need to be homogeneous to succeed as a country. In my opinion what is despicable is the way China is trying to increase the influx of Han Chinese to places of debate such as Xianjiang and Tibet. And she may be the most powerful lady in India, but she in no ways runs the government, if you had any idea how the constitution of India works, you would realise for one person to run the government is largely impossible as you would need a spread consensus of at least 10. The closest any one did come to run the government was Indira Gandhi and even she had to resort to an “Emergency” to maintain her control. India and China are both fascinating ancient countries, that are making their step into the big game. Wherein China has the vision and India has the right method. Both can learn from each other and when both stop seeing each other as threats, both will learn that growing simultaneously is beneficial for all. But, all this depends on who is the next man incharge in China, who after Hu?
Justin
Thought about subscribing to the RSS feed then I saw the same old delusional Indian myth of being offered a UNSC seat.
Doesn’t speak well for any paper that will publish this. Reminds me of how one of India’s minister recently cited the facts from an email chain letter about NASA’s engineers being composed of 1/4 of Indians.
Frank
China, India and Tibet problem can be solved easily by letting the disputed territory south of the McMahon Line in South Tibet declare independence.
South Tibet is currently under India control. The people in South Tibet are Tibetans. They are not going to be happy under India’s control. Sooner or later they will be a problem of India.
China is also claiming South Tibet.
So, if India lets South Tibet go. Give it back to Dalai Lama and his people!!!
Since China did not lose anything, China will agree. All territory related problems are resolved.
Don
Both China and India should give up North Tibet and South Tibet and restore Tibet as an independent nation as it existed before the Chinese invasion/annexation in the 50s. Dalai Lama and Tibetans would certainly take that and establish a fine demilitarized democracy as a buffer between two giant nuclear rivals. Let there be peace in the 21st century.
Michael
Don
Yes, of course, the day the West gives the land back to the Aboriginals, the Native Indians, Hawaiians and many other countries!
Indian Maverick
@ Frank
The way of Tibets issue should be for china to give back Tibet to its own people and withdraw from Tibet, so as for all territorial disputes to be dissolved and be at peace once again.
That way, there will never be a territory dispute for china, with india and others.
If china wants peace with its neighbours, that is the way to go.
Siddharth
South Asia is a new term coined by Chinese out of frustration (typical Chinese slave mentality) It never existed before the year 2000.
People in Arunachal Pradesh are Hindus and Indians. They are neither the Buddhists nor the Tibetans.
Laticia
So that’s the case? Quite a rveeltiaon that is.