Home > 2017 > China’s Support to Terrorist

Mainstream, VOL LV No 48 New Delhi November 18, 2017

China’s Support to Terrorist

Sunday 19 November 2017, by Kuldip Nayar

This is a familiar exercise. China resents India’s rule over Arunachal Pradesh. New Delhi, and, on the other hand, ignores the protests and treats the North-East territory as its own. Beijing has been irked by Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh. The noise was, however, louder when the Dalai Lama went there earlier.

China and India have seldom agreed on where the actual border line lies. Beijing attacked India in 1962 when New Delhi tried to get back its territory. However, this time India showed its muscles with the stand-off at Doklam. China had to withdraw its forces behind the present border. Prime Minister Narendra Modi went for the BRICS summit in September after the face-off, and by then the tension was reduced.

The positive side of the trip is the reiteration by the two countries to fight against terrorists. But here too Beijing elucidated its own line. It has again reneged on the proposed UN resolution which sought to put a ban on Azar Masood, a well-known terrorist. He could not be punished. The friendship of China and Pakistan is only getting stronger to the concern of New Delhi. Not long ago, Beijing had begun stapling visas of Indians visiting Arunachal. China wanted to indicate that it was a “separate territory”, not part of India.

New Delhi bore the humiliation quietly. In the past China had accepted without demur maps showing Arunachal Pradesh as India’s territory. To recall, the dispute is over a small territory lying between Arunachal and China’s border. The status of Arunachal Pradesh has been seldom questioned.

Tibet for China is like India’s Kashmir which too has raised the standard of independence. There is, however, one difference: the Dalai Lama is willing to accept an autonomous status for Tibet within China. Kashmir today wants independence.

Maybe, the Kashmiris will come round to accept a similar status one day. The problem is so complicated that a minor change can lead to a major catastrophe. Hence the risk is not worth taking. I have visited Bomdila Pass from where the Dalai Lama entered India to seek asylum. His land, Tibet, had been occupied by China, which has also destroyed the Tibetans’ culture. The Chinese have imposed communism and shown no respect for either the Dalai Lama or his monastery.

The Dalai Lama’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh has brought back the memories of the days before the Chinese annexed Tibet. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first Prime Minister, did not raise any objection at that time because he was on personal terms with Chinese Premier Chou Enlai. It is another story that he betrayed Nehru and China attacked India. It occupied thousands of kilometres of India. It has shown no intention to vacate it.

Tibet is another story of betrayal. True, it was under the suzerainty of Beijing but the autonomy of Tibet was considered unviolable. Suzerainty means a government exercising political control over a dependent state. Suzerainty does not mean absorption. Tibet was not even a part of China when India agreed to the suzerainty of China over it. Beijing betrayed Nehru again when it made the Dalai Lama’s stay at Lhasa impossible. The biggest betrayal was when China attacked India eight years later, in 1962.

The Dalai Lama’s visit may not have raised doubts about Tibet but it renewed the debate of its annexation by Beijing once again. China called his visit a “provocation”. Its warning to India was that the Dalai Lama’s visit would affect the normal relations between the two countries. That intensified with Doklam. Yet, India managed to hold its own.

In fact, China’s problems with India have roots in the British demarcation of the India-China border. China refuses to acknowledge the MacMahon Line that demarcates Arunachal Pradesh to be a part of India. Any activity that takes place in this area is viewed by China skeptically.

Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman’s visit to the “disputed’’ territory despite Chinese protest showed that New Delhi was prepared for hostilities if it comes to that pass. In 1962 the Indian soldiers did not have shoes for a mountain combat. India is now a power to reckon with.

It looks as if China would go on provoking India to exhaust the latter’s patience. When war is ruled out this is the only option China has. How to retaliate, without resorting to hostilities is the situation that India faces.

Beijing is trying to revive the Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai scenario. New Delhi cannot trust Beijing, particularly when it is trying to encircle India. China has given a big loan to Nepal. The port which Sri Lanka is building is at the behest of China. Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina is happy that China is trying to placate her.

But all should realise that India is no push-over now. Apart from war, India has many options. Taiwan is a trump card. It can revive the debate on two Chinas.

The question of terrorism is always there. Prime Minister Narendra Modi agreed with a Chinese leader that they share common concern over terrorism. A portion of the Muslim population living in China is beginning to assert itself. The Chinese leaders are ignoring the uprising. But they should realise that what the Muslims in China are doing has the support of Muslims in other countries. Still China would be helped by non-Muslim countries because they see terrorism at the heart of Muslim chauvinism.

The author is a veteran journalist renowned not only in this country but also in our neighbouring states of Pakistan and Bangladesh where his columns are widely read. His website is www.kuldipnayar.com

ISSN : 0542-1462 / RNI No. : 7064/62