India also should be equally concerned as it is unbecoming for a nation to be tangled in such petty problems with neighbouring countries, especially with Nepal
The age-old border dispute between India and China has again dominated the newspapers headlines. Now, Nepal has also entered the fray like a calf in the fight of the bulls. The border dispute, which had thawed a bit after China and India promised to settle it peacefully, has again raised its ugly head after the publication of a recent map by China showing Aksai Chin and parts of Arunachal Pradesh in Chinese territory. China's suggestion to India to calm down and the likelihood of Chinese President XI Jinping not travelling to India for the G20 meeting indicate a further slump in India-China relation.
In this map, the pointed spur map of Nepal has been ignored, and it has certainly raised concern in Nepal in view of China being perceived as more sympathetic to Nepal's border problems. The Chinese spokesperson had said in 2015, after signing an agreement with India regarding the construction of a road on Nepali territory, that it would talk to India if Nepal could produce evidence of ownership of the territory. When Prime Minister B P Koirala raised the boundary issue during his visit to China, late Mao Zedong had amicably brought an end to it by saying that there exist no problems between Nepal and China.
Nationalistic ripples were created in Nepal after the wall painting exhibited in India's new Parliament building showed Lumbini and Kapilbastu under India. When Nepal raised this issue, India replied that this was a cultural map going back to the times of Emperor Ashoka when these territories were under the illustrious emperor. This argument also does not seem to hold merit in the wake of the fact that the emperor had to fight with the Kirat King, Sthunko, giving the impression that this territory was not under the emperor.
Had that been the case, local chieftain Sthunko would not have ventured to mount opposition against the mighty emperor.
The India-China border was never delimited and was divided traditionally into three sectors. The western sector consisted of Aksai Chin, which India claimed to be a part of Ladakh. The middle sector had in its fold the area of Tibet-Kashmir-Punjab and Nepal-Ti-bet-Uttar Pradesh borders.
The eastern sector included the Mc Mohan Line, which is Arunachal Pradesh now under India. The Mc Mohan Line got disputed because it was drawn 60 km south of the Chinese border, which China does not accept. Still, Indo-China relations were at their peak after the establishment of diplomatic relations in 1950, with the popular slogan 'Indian, Chinese, brother, brother'. But it took a nosedive after the unexpected war of 1962. There were several factors behind the outbreak of the war.
Firstly, border disputes often lead to military aggression. Secondly, Mao and Nehru both looked upon themselves as defenders of national unity and integrity. Thirdly, China placed emphasis on the retention of territory going back to the Ming dynasty while India on that of the British Empire.
This relationship, however, warmed considerably as China in the late seventies and India in the early nineties were busy registering increasing national growth under economic liberation as both the countries were hit by inadequacy and deprivation.
Incidentally, China happened to achieve higher economic growth under the communist regime than India, which was comparatively slow to accomplish the same under a democratic dispensation. But India has been receiving laurels for its success in bringing development and democracy together lately.
It is probably due to this reality that India has been receiving more respectful treatment compared to earlier times when India was perceived as hopelessly torn by religious, ethnic and sectarian divisions as well as an immature democracy. The warm welcome accorded to Prime Minister Modi in Wuhan is a pointer to this direction. It was reciprocated equally well when XI visited India.
It is not that a search has not been made for an enduring peace by blunting this thorn in the country's relations. At one time, a peace proposal was proposed based on the ground that led to retention of Aksai Chin by China and Arunachal Pradesh by India.
Nehru rejected it fearing that it would be perceived as his weakness inside the Indian political circle. India-China relation has continued at best lukewarm or mostly cold due to this harsh reality.
Nepal-India border dispute surfaced after India unilaterally published a map showing Kalapani, Lipulekh and Limpiyadhura inside its territory. Nepal followed a tit-for-tat approach by publishing a map with a pointed spur incorporating the aforementioned places inside its territory riding on the unanimous approval of the Parliament. Now both India and China have ignored Nepal's sensitivity by publishing a map without the pointed spur.
China has to find a lasting solution because it has been alleged of highhandedness not only by India but also by countries like Japan, Malaysia and the Philippines. This tendency has been on the rise with the attainment of economic prowess that has catapulted it to the number 2 economic position of the world or even 1 based on purchasing power parity.
After all, it had tried sincerely once by putting forward a proposal based on the ground reality, but unfortunately, it was turned down by India.
India also should be equally concerned as it is unbecoming for a nation to be tangled in such petty problems with neighbouring countries, especially with Nepal, in view of its aspiration to become the world's third largest economy soon. Nepal has no other way than to expect justice based on hard evidence from great countries like India and China.
It is sad that India and China have resorted to political means when the time is to indulge in trade supremacy given their rising trading prowess in recent years and, above all, the pursuance of dialogue and debate towards an amicable settlement.
A version of this article appears in the print on September 05, 2023, of The Himalayan Times.
