INDIA SHOULD INSIST ON DEMILITARISATION OF TIBET
By
M.L. Sondhi
Organiser, January 15, 1989
The lack of any tangible progress in resolving the border
question at the Beijing Summit must come as a severe shock
to Indian public opinion which had pinned high hopes on a
break through as a result of publicity in the official
media. It is now clear that Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and
his advisers have gravely miscalculated and India has
suffered loss of prestige and setback in its negotiating
position. The Chinese have once again shown their prudent
determination to pursue their hegemonic aims while Rajiv
Gandhi’s appraisal of our Himalayan security prospects is
full of ambiguities and unanswered questions.
The unfortunate tenor and contents of Rajiv
Gandhi’s remarks on Tibet amount to an official endorsement
of the Chinese actions for making Tibet a formidable
military base against South Asia. By his ominous silence it
would appear that he has given his approval to the Chinese
deployment of nuclear weapons in Tibet, and his threatened
curbs on the political activity in favour of Tibetan rights
can only be perceived as his abetment of the repressive and
dictatorial system that Beijing has imposed on the Tibetans.
Instead of evolving a general consensus on
India’s China Policy, Mr. Rajiv Gandhi has made a number of
gratuitous and flippant remarks which are anathema to the
Indian Public. Clearly China has retained its options for a
situation like that developed in 1962 and their military
strategists are ready for a variety of contingencies. They
have also used the charm offensive of Hindi-Chini Bhai
Bhai and the Pancha Sheel declaration to induce a more
“relaxed” atmosphere which in fact will induce a pattern of
military restraints on India without undertaking serious any
meaningful confidence-building measures.
In view of the formidable Chinese military
build-up in Tibet, about which I have already given details
in the booklet “An Analytical Study of the Fatal
Consequences of Rajiv Gandhi’s Beijing Odyssey and Policy
Alternative in Sino-Indian Relations”. (extracts reproduced
in Organiser, in 9th October issue) Rajiv
Gandhi’s claim of reciprocal restraint is plainly
inaccurate. Instead of adopting a balanced and prudent
policy on deployment of forces on the border, Mr. Gandhi’s
efforts to work towards what he called “a mutually accepted
solution which is fair and reasonable” will in fact lead him
eventually to accept enhanced Chinese offensive capacity on
the frontiers of India and reduce deployments essential for
India’s own defence preparations. His claim that he has
been able to establish a personal relationship with the
Chinese leaders will not carry much weight with the Indian
public who will remember that the cordial and relaxed
relationship between Jawaharlal Nehru and Mao and
Chou-En-lai did not prevent the Chinese from intensifying
their military interest in the Himalayas.
The present strategic developments of the
Chinese in Tibet are very dangerous from the point of view
of Indian security interests. If one analyses the fine
print of the views expressed by Chairman Deng Xiao-ping,
President Yang Shangkun, Prime Minister Li Peng and
Vice-Premier Wu Xueqian, one simply does not find any “break
through” in the Sino-Indian issue which was expected.pected.
Diplomatic observers of other countries will
only come to the conclusion that Mr. Rajiv Gandhi’s visit
was a poorly prepared undertaking and did not take into
account the new strategic and political realities on the
international and regional scene. For example:
1.
Boundary Question:
The Indian pubic will be sceptical about Rajiv Gandhi’s
innocent protestation of both India and China having agreed
that pending solution to the boundary question, peace and
tranquillity should be maintained in the border areas. Even
if there is a phase of relaxation, it could be short-lived.
If for international reasons the Chinese have a political
military impetus for provoking a conflict in the Himalayan
area, they could at little cost to themselves come down from
Tibet in strength and encroach on Indian soil in order to
counteract what they regarded as negative developments
elsewhere. Until the border issue is settled finally, it is
easy for China to demonstrate its military muscle and
willingness to take risks. It is a masterful political
strike by the Chinese and a major setback for India that
they have pressured India into downgrading the central issue
of India’s strategic frontier.
2.
Tibet
as China’s internal affair: The Chinese are desperately looking for a way out of the impasse in
which they find themselves as a result of their trampling on
the political, and human rights of the Tibetans. The
seething unrest in Tibet is no longer a secret. Tibetan
students have demonstrated even in Beijing. Rajiv Gandhi
knows that China has violated international law and has
committed genocidal actions in Tibet. For a country which
is proud of being a democracy and has taken up the fight for
Palestinians, Angolans and South African blacks, it is
positively humiliating for its Prime Minister to say that
political forces in India will not be allowed to engage in
activities “harmful to China’s internal affairs”.
The Indian Parliament has addressed itself time and
again to the grievances of the Tibetans, and Indians would
not be worth their salt or worthy of the heritage of
Gandhiji if they did not speak up and demonstrate openly
when the rights of the Tibetans, who are their closest
cultural neighbours in the whole world, are badly trampled
by the Chinese. Mr. Rajiv Gandhi’s remarks will only ignite
mass Indian indignation and an appropriate response to
tangibly help the liberation movement in Tibet.
3.
Back to the Five Principles:
Diplomatic observers are intrigued by Mr. Rajiv Gandhi’s
rhetoric about the Five Principles and nostalgia about the
Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai days. He is bringing back memories of
Chinese duplicity and perfidy and psychologically speaking
this is not a step closer to peace between India and China
in the future. The political associations of Panch Sheel to
Indian public opinion are of complete mistrust leading to
open conflict. There are other models of resolution of
regional conflicts which Indians might accept, but the
response to Panch Sheel and “Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai” can
hardly be heart warming to a public which remembers the
fateful events of 1962 and has been through the smoke screen
of Chou En-lai’s rhetoric. If something tangible is to be
achieved in improving Sino-Indian relations Rajiv must stop
trying to resurrect the discredited and useless symbol of
the 5 principles.
4.
Foundation for a peaceful, stable and cooperative
relationship:
Mr. Gandhi’s claim that his visit is the foundation for a
new peaceful stable and cooperative relationship between
India and China is untenable. The first step towards real
and stable peace would have to be the withdrawal of the
Chinese from Indian territory which they have forcibly
occupied and the removal of the threat of a massive invasion
of India with the conventional and nuclear forces they have
built up in Tibet. Have the Chinese leaders offered to
remove this threat? A thinning out of Chinese forces or a
pull back is simply an eye wash for they could be sent back
into forward areas in no time. A stable peace could be built
on the concept of mutual and balanced security but this
would involve the demilitarisation and denuclearisation of
the Tibetan region. A cooperative relationship cannot be
built by merely signing a few technical agreements. It
requires constructive bargaining stances on outstanding
issues. The Beijing summit does not provide any hint of
that growing trust which is essential for mutual
cooperation. There is a conspicuous omission in the parleys
to the Dalai Lama’s 5 Point Plan which could alter the
course of history and give India, China and Tibet a real
chance of peace.
5.
New world order and learning from each other’s experience:
What do the two sides mean by a common commitment to a new
world order? Merely paying lip service to proposals to
revamp the global economic order does not blaze a new
trail. India has a well-defined attitude to international
economic restructuring, and it is hard for any decision
maker in New Delhi to take seriously proposals emanating
from Beijing at a time when it is still engaged in an uphill
struggle to free itself from the economic shibboleths of the
Maoist era. The results of China’s free-market
experimentation are still uncertain. India cannot even
begin to learn from China as the Prime Minister ardently
wishes until the Chinese make some-what clearer statements
of their honest intentions and inform the world accurately
about the results of their version of perestroika.
The effort to dress up the Summit’s results in terms of
enhanced prospects for bilateral cooperation only diverts
attention from the real issue: How to break the logjam on
the Himalayan military-strategic problem?
From the above perspective it is clear that the prospects
for Indian security have not been enhanced by the Beijing
summit. Rajiv Gandhi’s appraisal of the prospects of the
Summit appears to have been totally unjustified. It is not
enough to be a globe-trotting statesman, and particularly in
Rajiv’s case his reasoning does a grave injustice to those
who laid down their lives for the defence of the Himalayas
in 1962. |