Harsha Kakkar
The comment last week by the Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson, Wang Wenbin, ‘China does not recognise the so-called union territory of Ladakh illegally established by India, and opposes infrastructure construction in disputed border areas for military control purposes,’ was pushing a new hurdle into the current efforts at de-escalation. In addition, China sought to push forth its 1959 claim lines in the region, which India rejected.
China has been peeved with the speed of Indian development of infrastructure in border areas. This has reduced the advantage of faster movement which China possessed. Till recently, Chinese soldiers moved by vehicles, while Indians trudged on foot.
The Indian decision to abrogate article 370 and convert J and K into two union territories was an internal matter, for which India needed no global approval. However, post abrogation of article 370 and converting J and K into two union territories there were concerns from China due to pending resolution of the LAC and comments by the Home Minister that Aksai Chin remains as part of Indian territory and India will claim it back. Relations between the two countries was then cordial and the pandemic had yet to hit the globe, thus India opted to assuage Chinese perceptions.
Indian foreign minister, S Jaishankar, specifically visited China and briefed his counterpart of the decision and emphasized that it would make no difference to Indo-China relations. He subsequently stated, ‘I went a few days after the legislation to China and explained to them that as far as they were concerned, nothing had changed. India’s boundary had not changed, the Line of Actual Control had not changed.’ Raising of the same topic now is an indicator of diplomatic manoeuvring and seeking to gain an advantage by drawing India into a new controversy, apart from resolving the LAC.
India made similar efforts of conveying its reasons to its other global strategic partners, which was well accepted. There was an outcry from some individual personalities and human rights groups on the decision, mainly linked to detention of political leaders, blocking of internet services and enhanced presence of security forces to control any outburst of violence. With the situation remaining normal, almost all political leaders have been released, additional security forces withdrawn, and some level of internet connectivity resorted. Restrictions remainon internet services mainly to curb terrorism and its exploitation by terrorists.
Pakistan had also objected, including degrading diplomatic ties by withdrawing its High Commissioner from Delhi. It also raised the issue in global forums including the UN and OIC, which India rejected. Its attempts to link the removal of the article 370 to enhanced terrorism, false flag operations and a nuclear war, which Imran projected for two years in a row at the UN General Assembly have proved false.
Many questioned the Indian government for failing to respond to China by raising Taiwan and Tibet, pushing back its One-China policy. In Jun 2014, during an interaction with the Chinese foreign minister, Wang Yi, Sushma Swaraj had stated, ‘Mr Minister, we support the One China policy. However, we expect you to also have a One India policy.’ This discussion was in the context of China adopting the policy of stapled visa’s for residents of Arunachal and J and K. It was the first time India had placed the issue of One India policy on the table as a means of supporting the One China policy. China should be reminded of this conversation.
The current remarks by the Chinese spokesperson came on the day when the Indian Air Force chief, Air Chief Marshal RKS Bhadauria, speaking during a webinar stated that the prevailing situation along the LAC was ‘uneasy’. He added that a ‘no war, no peace’ status was prevailing in Eastern Ladakh.
The Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination (WMCC) meeting was conducted last week in the shadow of the growing diplomatic hardening. The statement issued post the meeting by the Chinese foreign office was noncommittal only stating further talks and disengagement.
Currently, both nations remain deployed in proximity. Despite Indian desires the LAC has become akin to the LOC, where eyeball to eyeball contact exists and the situation could easily escalate. Force levels on both sides are matching and neither is willing to revert to their original positions. The trust deficit is high hence, there is a concern on both sides that if they vacate their current positions, these could be exploited by the other side. The deployment is unlikely to change in the coming months and forces would remain in situ as temperatures drop to below minus 30 degrees Celsius.
Would China’s outpouring have any value within India? Should India react in a similar manner? China stating its non-recognition of Ladakh has no implications on Indian decision to create the Union Territory. The Chinese statement however implies that they consider Ladakh as part of J and K though not a separate Union Territory. Other than displaying a support to the Pak stance, which has already been rejected globally, it has no impact. Since Ladakh remains an integral part of India, Chinese discussions would remain with the Indian government. Indian silence is a display of it holding its retaliatory cards close to its chest, to be opened when the need arises.
Chinese demands for defining the LAC as per the 1959 agreement is another issue. While India has rejected the demand, claiming it was never accepted, it has ramifications in the current scenario. Backing it’s claims, China would insist on India pulling back from its deployment on the Kailash Ridge, which dominate all its positions, which India would refuse, while it would seek to continue in its present positions, stating they remain within this line. Their 1959 claim includes Aksai China which China already occupies, which India refuses to accept.
Though there was no mention of claims of the Chinese spokesperson in the recent talks, it is evident that insisting on it would be the future Chinese approach. The result is that negotiations, which are already complex would get more complicated with these additional claims. Ladakh would witness the current deployment continuing for a prolonged duration, with no resolution in sight.The next round of army talks are scheduled for 12 Oct, where India would propose disengagement across the region. The new Chinese claims are likely to be stumbling blocks and become hurdles for an early resolution to the standoffs.
The author is Major General (Retd)
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com
Follow our WhatsApp channel
