05-22-2005, 06:31 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>VIEW FROM CHINA </b>
<b>Aksai Chin, Arunachal ours, says China </b>
D. S. Rajan
The Peopleâs Republic of China (PRC) Premier Wen Jiabaoâs visit to India is over. A new era has begun in Beijing-New Delhi relations, say opinion makers in both the countries. An euphoria has come to prevail in India over the likely effect of the Guiding Principles agreed to by both the sides on solving the boundary question. But is the picture so optimistic? Does any one see fresh nuances signifying even a slight moderation in Chinese territorial position especially on Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh? The answers can be ânoâ, considering the reported latest Chinese intrusion in the Asaphila area of Arunachal Pradesh. Such an impression is also being reinforced by what is being conveyed in the post-visit period to readers within the PRC especially in Tibet, through authoritative Chinese language media articles on the border problem. At a time when border talks progress further, New Delhi requires to be alert and continuously monitor Chinese pronouncements on the border coming at various stages from now on, for their likely implications.
Let us pay attention to what the Global Times (affiliated to Peopleâs Daily group, Chinese language, www.tibetinfor.com,May 11,2005) says on the Sino-Indian border. Covering mainly the impressions gained by a group of journalists to border police and army posts along the Chinese side of the Line of Actual Control(LAC) in the first week of April 2005, it observed in a special report that the about 2000 km long Sino-Indian border stretches from Karakorum Pass in the West to the China-India-Burma tri-junction in the East. It highlighted the special feature and mystery surrounding the border. As special feature, it pointed to the absence of a border agreement between China and India historically which led to no formal fixing of the boundary. With no border markers and with only a traditional customary border , there was no way to correctly measure the total length of the boundary. The Sino-Indian border was not under dispute historically as Himalayas provided a natural barrier. Both the sides carried out their border activities on the basis of a traditional customary line, which is in the Southern side of Himalayas as the Tibetan peasants come down to their abodes in this side during winters. After the British occupation of India, the colonialists carried out a conspiracy to occupy Tibet parts by force , which created obstacles to border situation. The cited mystery related aspects included the thin population , long winters and lack of visitors from outside. The Global times report then described the extent of disputed territory as follows:<b> Total area in dispute â 125,000 Sq Kms; Eastern Sector- 90,000 Sq Kms; Middle Sector-2000 Sq Kms and Western Sector- 33000 Sq kms. </b>
The Chinese views mentioned above were more or less repeated in a Backgrounder on the Sino-Indian border given in the official Tibet website (Chinese language) www.tibet.cn/news of May 11,2005. It contained a firm accusation against the British colonialists and the then Tibet local authorities for attempting to incorporate 90000 Sq kms of Chinese territory in Eastern Sector into India through concocting the illegal McMahon line during the 1914 Simla Conference. Historically, the Chinese Governments never recognized such attempts. Criticising the post-1947 Indian administration for its territorial policy of â advancing to the Northâ, it alleged that by the Year 1953, Indian territory expanded gradually upto the illegal McMahon line.
What the Chinese media have said in details about Arunachal could be important. Referring to the calm in the borders in the post- â1962 counter-attack in self-defenceâ period, the Global Times report remarked that much of the LAC coincide with the illegal âMc Mahonâ line in the Eastern Sector. It alleged that many years before, India set up Arunachal Pradesh in its region of Actual Control and so far 7 million people have moved to this region. Stating that Tawang, lying in the Indian - controlled region, is of concern to China as that townâs Wu Qin Ling is the ancestral village of the 6th Dalai Lama and the Tibetan masses therefore attach religious importance to it, the report expressed the view that the difficulties in settling the border dispute in Eastern Sector could become less if such principles concerning nationality and religion are given weight at the time of settlement.It added that with an airport in Linzhi coming up, there are good prospects for development in this area once the Sino-Indian border issue gets solved and opening up of borders takes place. The above mentioned Tibet website, on its part, accused India for setting up in the year 1954, the so called North East Frontier Agency (NEFA) in the âillegally occupied Chinese territoryâ. NEFA became the Centrally- administered Arunachal in 1972. Arunachal was subsequently made an Indian Province on December 8,1986 by an Act passed by both the Houses of the Indian Parliament. The Government of the PRC treats such Act illegal and refuses to recognize the so called Arunachal Pradesh.
Referring to Middle Sector, the Global Times report noted the exchange of maps between India and China showing their respective actually controlled regions some years back..The dispute in this sector is less serious and a preliminary solution to the same has already been found, it added.
Giving its views on the dispute in the Western sector, the Global times report alleged that the British colonialists incorporated a good portion of Chinese territory in the Western Sector into India on the basis of their concocted map, the chief author of which was the British infantry Colonel John Ardagh. The concoction of âArdagh mapâ parallels that of Mc Mahon relating to the Eastern Sector, the report pointed out. Global Times further commented that even though there are several unclear areas in the Western sector, China basically controls the Aksai Chin region, which is strategically important to the PRC as the Xinjiang â Tibet road passes through it. Only through this road, much of the required raw material needed for Ali region of Tibet are being transported. The report then revealed that the PRC naval boats are operating in the Chinese side of Pan Gong lake in Aksai Chin <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>Aksai Chin, Arunachal ours, says China </b>
D. S. Rajan
The Peopleâs Republic of China (PRC) Premier Wen Jiabaoâs visit to India is over. A new era has begun in Beijing-New Delhi relations, say opinion makers in both the countries. An euphoria has come to prevail in India over the likely effect of the Guiding Principles agreed to by both the sides on solving the boundary question. But is the picture so optimistic? Does any one see fresh nuances signifying even a slight moderation in Chinese territorial position especially on Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh? The answers can be ânoâ, considering the reported latest Chinese intrusion in the Asaphila area of Arunachal Pradesh. Such an impression is also being reinforced by what is being conveyed in the post-visit period to readers within the PRC especially in Tibet, through authoritative Chinese language media articles on the border problem. At a time when border talks progress further, New Delhi requires to be alert and continuously monitor Chinese pronouncements on the border coming at various stages from now on, for their likely implications.
Let us pay attention to what the Global Times (affiliated to Peopleâs Daily group, Chinese language, www.tibetinfor.com,May 11,2005) says on the Sino-Indian border. Covering mainly the impressions gained by a group of journalists to border police and army posts along the Chinese side of the Line of Actual Control(LAC) in the first week of April 2005, it observed in a special report that the about 2000 km long Sino-Indian border stretches from Karakorum Pass in the West to the China-India-Burma tri-junction in the East. It highlighted the special feature and mystery surrounding the border. As special feature, it pointed to the absence of a border agreement between China and India historically which led to no formal fixing of the boundary. With no border markers and with only a traditional customary border , there was no way to correctly measure the total length of the boundary. The Sino-Indian border was not under dispute historically as Himalayas provided a natural barrier. Both the sides carried out their border activities on the basis of a traditional customary line, which is in the Southern side of Himalayas as the Tibetan peasants come down to their abodes in this side during winters. After the British occupation of India, the colonialists carried out a conspiracy to occupy Tibet parts by force , which created obstacles to border situation. The cited mystery related aspects included the thin population , long winters and lack of visitors from outside. The Global times report then described the extent of disputed territory as follows:<b> Total area in dispute â 125,000 Sq Kms; Eastern Sector- 90,000 Sq Kms; Middle Sector-2000 Sq Kms and Western Sector- 33000 Sq kms. </b>
The Chinese views mentioned above were more or less repeated in a Backgrounder on the Sino-Indian border given in the official Tibet website (Chinese language) www.tibet.cn/news of May 11,2005. It contained a firm accusation against the British colonialists and the then Tibet local authorities for attempting to incorporate 90000 Sq kms of Chinese territory in Eastern Sector into India through concocting the illegal McMahon line during the 1914 Simla Conference. Historically, the Chinese Governments never recognized such attempts. Criticising the post-1947 Indian administration for its territorial policy of â advancing to the Northâ, it alleged that by the Year 1953, Indian territory expanded gradually upto the illegal McMahon line.
What the Chinese media have said in details about Arunachal could be important. Referring to the calm in the borders in the post- â1962 counter-attack in self-defenceâ period, the Global Times report remarked that much of the LAC coincide with the illegal âMc Mahonâ line in the Eastern Sector. It alleged that many years before, India set up Arunachal Pradesh in its region of Actual Control and so far 7 million people have moved to this region. Stating that Tawang, lying in the Indian - controlled region, is of concern to China as that townâs Wu Qin Ling is the ancestral village of the 6th Dalai Lama and the Tibetan masses therefore attach religious importance to it, the report expressed the view that the difficulties in settling the border dispute in Eastern Sector could become less if such principles concerning nationality and religion are given weight at the time of settlement.It added that with an airport in Linzhi coming up, there are good prospects for development in this area once the Sino-Indian border issue gets solved and opening up of borders takes place. The above mentioned Tibet website, on its part, accused India for setting up in the year 1954, the so called North East Frontier Agency (NEFA) in the âillegally occupied Chinese territoryâ. NEFA became the Centrally- administered Arunachal in 1972. Arunachal was subsequently made an Indian Province on December 8,1986 by an Act passed by both the Houses of the Indian Parliament. The Government of the PRC treats such Act illegal and refuses to recognize the so called Arunachal Pradesh.
Referring to Middle Sector, the Global Times report noted the exchange of maps between India and China showing their respective actually controlled regions some years back..The dispute in this sector is less serious and a preliminary solution to the same has already been found, it added.
Giving its views on the dispute in the Western sector, the Global times report alleged that the British colonialists incorporated a good portion of Chinese territory in the Western Sector into India on the basis of their concocted map, the chief author of which was the British infantry Colonel John Ardagh. The concoction of âArdagh mapâ parallels that of Mc Mahon relating to the Eastern Sector, the report pointed out. Global Times further commented that even though there are several unclear areas in the Western sector, China basically controls the Aksai Chin region, which is strategically important to the PRC as the Xinjiang â Tibet road passes through it. Only through this road, much of the required raw material needed for Ali region of Tibet are being transported. The report then revealed that the PRC naval boats are operating in the Chinese side of Pan Gong lake in Aksai Chin <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->