Is the Tibet act pushing China-India into confrontation?

Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was the first prime minister of India and also elected three times straight. In post World War-II times, the world was divided into two. The US led one side while the Soviet Union led another.

Nehru led the Non-Aligned Movement to maintain an equal distance from both the sides. But he couldn't maintain his neutrality completely in the end. It was not possible for Nehru to remain neutral or non-aligned due to the activities of the CIA in Tibet.

Tibet's so-called ruler and religious leader Tenzin Gyatso (14th Dalai Lama) entered the North-East Frontier Agency (NEFA) (currently Arunachal Pradesh) on 17 March 1959 and later took shelter in India. Since then, warm relations with India's friendly neighbour China started to turn sour.

There were good relations --'China-Hind bhai bhai' over the historial rights of the West's Johnson Line and previous McMahon Line determined by the British king. But the relations started to sour and at one stage the relations turned into a military clash.

The then Indian prime minister Nehru's close friend and Chinese leader Zhou Enlai took special initiative to ease the tension.

While visiting Delhi in 1960, Zhou Enlai brought up the Tibet issue and gave an 'acceptable' proposal to ease tension of west border and lessen border dispute. But Nehru was compelled to reject the proposal of Zhou Enlai due to high expectations of the Indian prime minister's advisers and political analysts. Later, a bloody war took place between two countries for about a month.

China occupied 38,000 square kilometers of the  Aksai Chin in the west frontier in the war between 20 October and 21 November 1962. Simultaneously, they occupied the eastern border till east of Assam and withdrew troops declaring a ceasefire unilaterally.

The  Aksai Chin lost by India is still under the occupation of China. The border line there was drawn between two countries through the Line of Actual Control. The massive defeat of India in the war of 1962 was not a pain just for Nehru, but also a psychological pain even today for India.

China still claims the Arunachal Pradesh of India as its own land. China strongly protested the visit of Indian prime minister Narendra Modi in the region in March 2024. They say the region is of China, not of India.

In response, India said Arunachal Pradesh is a part and parcel of India. China didn't issue visas for three players (they are from Arunachal) of Indian "wushu" team for Asian Games held in China in 2023 and the Indian national team cancelled China visit in protest against this. Rejecting visa for players, China wanted to show Arunachal is its part, not India's.

In contest of the lesson India learnt from the war of 1962, it is highly militarised in that region and has improved its communication system there. Simultaneously, India improved the protection of the Siliguri corridor or Chicken Neck and supply line. Despite that, this region is highly risky and is under direct surveillance of China.

Here India should ensure an alternative and safe crisis-period supply route. Indian geo-strategists have become proactive to find out this route.
The disastrous psychological pressure the Indian army endured in the beginning of China-India war in 1962, its reflection is seen in the current foreign and military policy of India. Indian diplomats and politicians have admitted that the matter has got attached with the psychology of India.

Although the two countries are maintaining cooperation in the international arena and bilateral trade, the border dispute is becoming more complex. Alongside occupied Aksai Chin, China claims Arunachal and some areas of Assam historically the outer areas of Tibet.

Beijing often reminds Delhi that historically Arunachal (once NEFA) was part of China before 1914. China has named this province Siang. Simultaneously, China has given Chinese names in 30 places in this region.
I have mentioned the historical issues in this article to point out the geopolitical context of that region.

We all know the US has become desperate to contain the rise of China as a global power. In the context of the emergence of Quad in the Indian Ocean and South Asia region and the emergence of India as a big power, China now has two sensitive issues. One is Taiwan and the other is Tibet.

Despite India's occupation of Sikkim and inclusion of the land in 1975, there was an unwritten understanding between China and India that the issue of Tibet and the so-called authority of the Dalai Lama would remain concealed. At least after the visit to Beijing by the then prime minister in 1979, there was an indication of a solution to the dispute over Tibet.

US relations with China was built up as the US accepted the 'One China policy' in 1971. The US recognised Tibet and the outer part of Tibet as part of China. But over a couple of years, the US is taking the Tibet issue against China. As a result, China's relations are not only deteriorating with the US, but also with India. The limited clashes in Galwan valley between China and India in 2020 is proof of it.

It is clear that the equation of China-India-US geopolitics centering Tibet is very complex and it is heading towards conflict. Seven members of both parties in the US Congress visited India last month. They met the Dalai Lama at Dharamshala and members of the expatriate government. The US leader handed over a copy of 'Resolve Tibet Act' passed on 12 June to Tibet leaders.

China has been called upon to open the door of discussions with the Dalai Lama over the autonomy of Tibet through this act of the US. The act says the US will continue cooperation with the so called expatriate government of Tibet. China expressed an angry reaction against this US new policy over Tibet.

Meanwhile, the US team met prime minister Narendra Modi on 20 June and apprised him of the new act. Amid the US  changing policy over Tibet, India's new tension with China opened in the beginning of Modi taking over power for the third time.

As both sides increased military capability at the border of Arunachal over the couple of years, it can be assumed that like the third term of Nehru, the current tension may turn into a border conflict during the third term of Modi. However, India feels there is no situation like 1962 and they are ready to respond equally to China.

India needs to create a well protected alternative route against the so-called Chicken's Neck or Siliguri Corridor due to geo-strategic reasons. This work they want to start immediately.

In this case, they want cooperation from Bangladesh. In this case, geo-strategists and geopoliticians should think about what should be the position of Bangladesh if the probable clashes between China and India at the east border is taken into consideration.

*Dr M Sakhawat Hossain is election analyst, former army officer and SIPG senior research fellow (NSU).

* This column appeared in the print and online edition of Prothom Alo and has been rewritten for the English edition by Rabiul Islam