Countries that wish to invade do not do so by pitching tents!

What is so honourable in defending or dis-honourable in not defending
the 'Johnson line' in Aksai Chin? That is a question that needs to be
asked to the Indian shouting brigade. The Chinese also need to be
asked as to why they wish to implement the 'MacDonald McCartney' line
drawn by British Imperialists? asks Col (retd) Anil Athale.


The recent face of between India [ Images ] and China in the Aksai
Chin area makes one feel a strong sense of déjà vu! It is only last
year that the country observed the 50th anniversary of that
unfortunate conflict and much ink was spilled by the Indian media to
assert how '1962' will not be repeated!

Yet what is one to make out of a leading national English daily giving
screaming headline, 'Chinese pitch 5th Tent in disputed area!' The
jingoism, uninformed comments, criticism of government, cries of
'surrender to the Chinese'. If a Rip Van Vinkle would have woken up
after 50 years he would find it all very familiar.

Naville Maxwell's otherwise biased account (India's China War) has one
very pertinent observation, 'Indian government was goaded into
foolhardy action by an un-informed media and public opinion to embark
on a disastrous course of action'.

Let us at least after 50 years be rational and stop being emotional
where Aksai Chin is concerned. Aksai Chin was essentially a 'No Man's
Land' between Ladakh and Tibet [ Images ]. A god forsaken cold desert
where 'not a blade of grass grows' as famously remarked by Pandit
Jawaharlal Nehru [ Images ]! Aksai Chin became part of British India
in a typical 'imperial' map making exercise that wanted a land wedge
between the eastward expanding Russia [ Images ] and Tibet.

The threat never materialised and Aksai Chin remained a line on map.
Neither we nor the Chinese showed any interest in this area till the
late 1950s when they constructed a road between the two restive
provinces of Xingang and Tibet. It was militarily important for them.

They did this unilaterally without even informing India. Instead of
acknowledging the Chinese interest and accepting that India had none
and the dubious nature of the status of Aksai Chin area, we went in
for a 'maximalist' solution, claimed whole of Aksai Chin as ours and
despite known military weakness embarked on a 'flag showing'
aggressive creation of small posts to bolster our claim -- as if this
was some legal domestic land dispute where possession is 9/10 of law!

Even 51 years after the dispute we seemed stuck in justifying our
claims based on legacy of British imperialism! If Aksai Chin had some
strategic importance for us then one would understand the use of
history in terms of real politick, but our response to the Chinese
provocation seems wholly emotional and out of proportion to the
Chinese actions.

Countries that wish to invade territory do not do so by pitching tents!

This does not mean that the Chinese actions are merely 'tactical' as
PM has said. The decision to establish tents and structures in
'disputed' areas must have been taken at higher level. If the post
established is threatening our access to the areas to the north, then
we must take appropriate action. But this is a plea to let the armed
forces and government do the needful and there is no need for the
'emotional' response.

We must, while safeguarding our interests of defence of Ladakh, also
acknowledge that Aksai Chin is indeed a disputed territory. Our claim
to this area and Chinese counter claim stands on an entirely different
footing than say Arunachal Pradesh. Chinese claim on whole of
Arunachal Pradesh is spurious and goes against their own 'principles'
where they have accepted the MacMohan line and watershed principle to
demarcate border with Myanmar.

If one could venture to suggest a solution to Aksai Chin dispute, the
Russia-China agreement on Amur-Usuri border offers a good model. But
both sides must look at the dispute through a prism of 'realism' and
discard the baggage of history.

But the current stand off, certainly initiated by the Chinese, is
curious in terms of timing. China is at this very moment engaged in a
far more serious face off with Japan [ Images ] over the
Diaoyu/Senkaku islands. The Chinese premier is scheduled to visit
India soon. There is scheduled Indo-US meet in May to discuss China
specifically.

Is this a 'signal' to India to stay away from the US-Japan axis? Or is
it a typical media manipulation by the west to thwart and Sino-Indian
rapprochement? It is difficult to comment with the fog of
disinformation so thick.

A word of caution to the main opposition party in India, it must not
play into the hands of media manipulators and make this a 'domestic'
political issue. All Indians must stand behind the government/armed
forces for whatever action they deem fit. It is time the main
opposition behaved in a mature manner and not like the leader of
opposition did during the 1999 Kargil [ Images ] conflict with
Pakistan.

There is a possibility that the Chinese have decided to activate the
Sino-Indian border in view of the developing situation in Afghanistan
post the US withdrawal in 2014. This may be one of the ways that China
wants to help its 'all weather' friend Pakistan.

Incidentally, the Chinese help to Pakistan in increasing its nuclear
arsenal is far greater provocation as far as India is concerned.
Compared to that, the Ladakh incident is a mere pin prick. One also
wonders if the Chinese have decided that strengthening its proxy
Pakistan is in its long term interest rather than any normalisation of
relations with India.

For all the talk of China taking a long-term view of relations, this
seems a particularly myopic course of action. A course of action that
India has studiously avoided vis a vis China and Taiwan.

While Chou En Lie in 1960s quite rightly pointed out that India and
China must move away from the disputes created by Western imperialism,
it seems that China is supporting the biggest imperialist creation --
Pakistan!

This author stands by a suggestion made at track II in 2006 that India
and China must tackle its border disputes sector by sector. For
instance, there is no dispute over the border alignment in Uttarakhand
[ Images ] (Garhwal Kumaon area) as well as border along Himachal
Pradesh [ Images ]. These could well be demarcated and demilitarised.
Aksai Chin area should be demarcated with realistic give and take and
China should withdraw its fraudulent claim on Arunachal Pradesh.

Will India and China have the sense to do this before the American
power 'pivots' to Asia? Future of peace in Asia may well depend on
these decisions.
rediff