While the renewed focus on resolving the border dispute between India and China is very much welcomed, the contention over the definition of borderline both in the eastern and western sector should not be allowed to stall cooperation and forward movement on other issues. It is obvious that differences continue to remain with claims and counter-claims between the two sides particularly in the western sector of the international border. The sixth round of Sino-Indian border talks held in Beijing recently, has again ended in failure, with the Chinese side insisting on the occupied Aksai Chin in Ladakh as inalienably Chinese territory.
From the point of modern history, relationship between New Delhi and Beijing has always been a mixed one with much turns and twists along the way. Although India’s faith in communist China has been shaken on numerous occasions—most notably China’s invasion of Tibet, the 1962 border war and open support for Pakistan—New Delhi has more often than not remained cool to the idea of placating her powerful neighbour.
Despite such romanticism, India would have to come to terms with the reality of having a nuclear power at her doorstep and the baggage of history with unresolved problems. China’s game of map-manship and territorial claims in NEFA (presently Arunachal Pradesh) and Ladakh (Aksai Chin), the revolt in Tibet and the Dalai Lama’s political asylum in India are all lingering issues which has not allowed mutual understanding to permeate relation between the two sides.
But in recent years to the credit of both sides, the differences have not been allowed to come in the way of broader cooperation in other areas. Terrorism and the rise of religious fundamentalism, especially in the wake of the disintegration of the Soviet Union, pose for Beijing not only an ideological dilemma but a very urgent internal security threat. Even if, weapons technology and arms transfers to Pakistan continue, China should not hesitate in tackling religious extremism or terrorism nor extend support for the same abroad. In a marked departure from earlier policy, China had chosen not to support Pakistan in the aftermath of the Kargil War. In present circumstances, it would not be unreasonable to expect this trend to continue. This augurs well for India.
While differences will remain on the border dispute, there is an increasing area for cooperation that needs to be identified particularly in the area of trade and commerce. On the intractable border dispute, both Beijing and New Delhi should consolidate peace and tranquillity along the Line of Actual Control but without foreclosing the ultimate solution of the border issue.
A cordial Sino-Indian ties is good not only for the world but also for the region with the possibility of reigning in trouble from the northern front (Pakistan) while allowing for reducing the militarization of South Asia, cutting down troops in the border areas and paving the way for commercial and strategic alliance in real terms.
