Arunachal Pradesh seemed to dominate th4e 13th Indo-China talks in New Delhi on Aug 7-8. China lays claim to parts of the north-eastern Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh (AP). The McMohan line forms the disputed border along the AP region and was drawn after an agreement between Tibet and Britain in 1914. China rejects the legality of the agreement claiming that Tibet had no right to sign treaties as it was not a sovereign state. India considers it to be the legal border.
The disputed border in the Arunachal Pradesh region
Last week’s talks could not have been expected to make significant progress in resolving the border issue given the increase in tensions following the ADB loan to India. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) recently granted India a loan of $2.9 billion, out of which $60 million is reserved for a watershed management project in AP. This loan was seen in India as a major scoring point as China unsuccessfully tried to block the loan on the grounds that the region was a disputed territory. India responded by asserting that AP is an integral part of India and it would rather give up the loan request than give away the region to China.
In 2005 the two countries came to an agreement on certain political parameters and guiding principals to be used in peacefully resolving the decades long conflict. However, border talks between the two countries have been stuck on the Tawang region in AP which was the birth place of the sixth Dalai Lama. China wants the region to be returned to the Tibetans (i.e. effectively China.) The Tibetan government in exile does not support the demand. Reports of Google Maps depicting parts of AP in Chinese only added to tensions surrounding the recent talks.
Though the new round of talks did not make any significant progress in resolving the border issue, it did lead to setting up a hotline between New Delhi and Beijing. It is also interesting that the border talks included discussion on trade and economic issues, bilateral relations and terrorism. During Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to Beijing last year, the two countries had agreed to improving bilateral relations and working towards peace and prosperity in the region. They “committed to resolving outstanding differences, including on the boundary question, through peaceful negotiations, while ensuring that such differences are not allowed to affect the positive development of bilateral relations….. seek a fair, reasonable and mutually acceptable solution to the boundary question and to build a boundary of peace and friendship on the basis of the Agreement on Political Parameters and Guiding Principles for the Settlement of the China-India Boundary Question concluded in April 2005.”
In spite of the parameters and guidelines neither of the two countries seems keen on resolving the issue anytime soon. On the Indian side of the border the army has been increasing and upgrading its presence in the region. There are plans to position “two army divisions, each comprising around 25,000 to 30,000 personnel, as also a squadron of frontline Sukhoi Su-30 MKI combat jets at a key airbase in the northeast.” The move is with a view to meeting “future security challenges,” but the size of the proposed deployment does not suggest that India intends to give up its rights over even an inch of AP. The ADB loan and plans for infrastructural development in the region suggest that the Indian government wants to make sure that the people in AP favor India. The guidelines ask the two parties to consider the interests of the populations in the region, and this seems to be a way to ensuring that their interests are in being with India.
While the guidelines agreement is a positive step it seems unlikely to aid quick resolution of the dispute. It asks that the boundary settlement be “final, covering all sectors” in dispute. It also asks the two sides to “give due consideration to each other’s strategic and reasonable interests, and the principle of mutual and equal security.” The perceptions of security and national interests are difficult to coverage. Another problem is that one of the two regions, Aksai Chin, is in the Jammu& Kashmir region which brings the Pakistan angle into play. So it seems that even if the AP dispute is resolved, it would not lead to a lasting agreement if the Aksai Chin part remains unresolved.
The India-China border dispute might take years to resolve. But the two countries should try to work past those differences and improve bilateral economic relations as seems to be the current direction. Improved trade relations and cultural exchanges will only help increase trust and resolve other issues.
(In other China related news, China admitted that its companies were involved in exporting fake ‘Made in India’ drugs to Nigeria.)
