…..Continuing) From 1917 to 1933, the “Postal Atlas of China”, published by the Government of China in Peking had shown the boundary in Aksai Chin as per the Johnson line, which runs along the Kunlun Mountains. In 1925, the “Peking University Atlas”, also put the Aksai Chin in India.
Thus, upon independence in 1947, the government of India used the Johnson Line as the basis for its official boundary in the west, which included the Aksai Chin. In 1956–57, China constructed a road through Aksai Chin, connecting Xinjiang and Tibet, which ran south of the Johnson Line in many places. The road came on Chinese maps published in 1958.
There is a protracted correspondence between Nehru and Chou en Lai on the issues of the border. A letter was written by Chou en Lai dated 07 Nov 1959 postulated ‘each side withdraw 20 kilometers from the line up to which each side exercises actual control in the west (Ladakh).
In the fall of 1962, China launched two major offensives, one in Chip Chap Valley in Aksai Chin and the other in Namka Chu. In the Western Sector, they completely swept across Aksai Chin, and captured Chip Chap Valley, Galwan Valley and Pangong Tso Lake.
Pak “leased” the Shaksgam Valley to China in 1963 in exchange for military and nuclear cooperation. China had then said that final settlement will be done with whoever finally owns Shaksgam. But India never even broached the issue with China. Concurrent to the Doklam standoff of 2017, China established PLA posts in Shaksgam valley and connected them by road which is being extended to the North of Karakoram Pass.
In 1972, Chou en Lai took a unilateral decision to retain over 2000 sq km of Ladakh. China later ceded over 750 sq km to Pakistan and in return, Pakistan recognized Chinese sovereignty on almost 800 sq km of land in Northern Kashmir and Ladakh.
Border incidents remained a common feature throughout, particularly transgression. In August 1959, the PLA took an Indian prisoner at Longju, and two months later in Aksai Chin, a clash at Kongka Pass led to the death of nine Indian frontier policemen. Some of the major conflicts include 1967 (Sikkim), 1987 (Sumdorong Cho), 2013 (DBO), 2014 (Doklam) etc.
Nearly six decades have passed since then, but the border issue remains unresolved. What is called “transgressions”, happen with regularity and most are mutually and amicably resolved without reaching the media, under the provisions of the various agreements by ‘banner drills’ or ‘Border Personnel Meetings’ (BPM).
Viewed from a historical perspective, in a short-term context the resolution of the border dispute in Ladakh can only be resolved at the highest political level; but not at the military level. Whatever claims India could lay to territories were squandered when Nehru stopped the Indian Army’s offensive in J & K as a consequence of which India lost its claims to Gilgit-Baltistan and Shaksgam region given on lease by Pakistan to China. Also, Nehru failed to seize the opportunity of the unofficial offer of Zhou Enlai that India drops its claims to Aksai Chin in return for a Chinese withdrawal of claims over NEFA.
So what? The lesson of history is simple. Power respects power. India can ill afford to withdraw its forces from tactically critical posts like the Daulat Beg Oldi. Disengagement, at best, should only be to bases in depth from where troops will be able to redeploy as and where necessary in the future. Meanwhile, develop matching hard power earliest so that talks for resolution at the political level– soft power – are held on equal footing. Even militarily one must also consider the employment of ADMs (Atomic Demolition Munitions) to deter and deny Chinese incursions/intrusions into disputed areas. Pending accretion of hard power, India must forge a new and favorable strategic equilibrium across not only the Asia-Pacific region and the Indian Ocean domain, but also on the international plane as counter to China’s military doctrine of “Creeping incrementalism and extended coercion” and “Salami Slicing”.
CONGRESS PARTY’S DUPLICITOUS BEHAVIOR OVER INDIA-CHINA RELATIONS
The Congress Party solicited friendship with China over the past 75 years and played second fiddle in international affairs by propagating Panch Sheel between the 1950s and 1970s. Subsequently, also, Rajiv Gandhi, Sonia Gandhi, and Rahul Gandhi indulged in duplicitous behavior in their dealings with China.
Therefore, Jairam Ramesh, a self-styled “Know-all” and Chief Spokesperson of the Congress Party, has no right to castigate Modi over his remarks on the India-China border dispute during his interview with US-based Newsweek magazine. Jairam Ramesh wrote on X, “The Prime Minister was at his cowardly worst. His only comment on China’s repeated infringements on Indian sovereignty was that the India- China border situation needs to be addressed urgently to resolve the ‘abnormality’ in the bilateral interactions. “Ramesh asserted that PM Modi’s remarks were not only “disgraceful” but also “disrespectful” to the soldiers who laid down their lives while defending the India-China border.
Jairam Ramesh also demanded; “The Prime Minister should apologize to the 140 crore Indians for deceiving them on national television on June 19th, 2020, with his statement ‘Na Koi Ghusa Hai, NaHi Koi Ghus Aaya Hai’ (nobody entered India and nobody has entered any post) and keeping the nation in dark about his failures in protecting the borders with China”.
In 2023, Rahul Gandhi also criticized the NDA government, stating that Minister of External Affairs (MEA) S Jaishankar does not understand the threat that China poses to India. Speaking to members of the Indi- Journalists’ Association in London, Gandhi said that Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s statement that “nobody has entered Indian territory” is an invitation to China to repeat its aggression on the LAC.
Having served on the borders of the North East Frontier Agency since 1961 and fought in the 1962 war, commanded a battalion in “CholaPass” of East Sikkim during 1981-1982, planned operations in Bomdila, Tse La, Tawang and opposite Bum La Pass as a reserve Brigade Commander, and published a book titled “China’s Holistic Security Strategic Perspective” in 2016, I have no hesitation in condemning the barbs against Modi and Jaishankar by Jairam Ramesh and Rahul Gandhi, which mercilessly exposes their double standards on sensitive foreign policy issues.
Let me recount the Congress Party stalwart’s flirtations with China over the past 75 years. Nehru, the first Prime Minister for over 16+ years (1947-1964) committed the following blunders in dealing with China to include: aiding the invading PLA army on Mao’s instructions, sending rice into Tibet; erasing Tibet as a Nation; handing over Aksai Chin(37,244 sq. Km) on a plate to China during1950s; failed to settle boundary disputes; the Himalayan Blunder of India-China War; advocating UN/UNSC seat for China; refusing a seat at the UN Security Council saying, “not at the cost of China”; deterring assistance to Naga separatists; and neglecting the Northeast.
Next, Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi made an official goodwill visit to the PRC in December 1988 accompanied by Mrs. Sonia Gandhi, Mr. Narasimha Rao, Minister of External Affairs of India, and others. During the visit, he discussed the boundary question and agreed to settle this question through peaceful and friendly consultations. They affirmed to take concrete steps, such as establishing a joint working group on the boundary question and others. The Indian side reiterated the consistent policy that Tibetistan autonomous region of China and that anti-China political activities by Tibetan elements are not permitted on Indian soil. Recalling the meeting between Gandhi and Deng, former diplomat Yang Wenchang said the Chinese leader had even suggested the existing McMahon Line as the border. Rajiv Gandhi thereby missed a golden opportunity to settle the border issue. (To be continued)
