To all Indian members here. A question...

[Janmejay]

Ok guys after going through the thread,i have one question.Some of the Chinese posters are saying that British India and Tibet gov. demarcated border without taking rest of China into account.My question is why we should have taken China into account when China was not present as a country at that time??

 

[sincity]

Why don't India and China fight a final battle to decide the territory once and for all, let the victor control all the dispute territory. Only war can decide who is the rightful owner of the territory if both side refuse to solve this problem through diplomacy.

 

[Kloitra]

Why don't India and China fight a final battle to decide the territory once and for all, let the victor control all the dispute territory. Only war can decide who is the rightful owner of the territory if both side refuse to solve this problem through diplomacy.

Now this is what Americans would want!

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Ok guys after going through the thread,i have one question.Some of the Chinese posters are saying that British India and Tibet gov. demarcated border without taking rest of China into account.My question is why we should have taken China into account when China was not present as a country at that time??

India recognizes Tibet as a part of China, so does every other Government in the world. Even the Dalai Lama recognizes it.

So obviously, any treaty between the Tibetan separatists and British India is null and void.

 

[Janmejay]

India recognizes Tibet as a part of China, so does every other Government in the world. Even the Dalai Lama recognizes it.

So obviously, any treaty between the Tibetan separatists and British India is null and void.

I am not talking about present but before 1962 war as China said that any such treaty is null and void because rest of China was not taken into account.Sounds so stupid ,doesnt it??

 

[Kloitra]

Ok guys after going through the thread,i have one question.Some of the Chinese posters are saying that British India and Tibet gov. demarcated border without taking rest of China into account.My question is why we should have taken China into account when China was not present as a country at that time??

Tibet was basically autonomous region of China. May be this will help:

Tibet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Like the preceding Yuan dynasty, the Manchus of the Qing dynasty exerted military and administrative control of the region, while granting it a degree of political autonomy. The Qing commander publicly executed a number of supporters of the rebels, and, as in 1723 and 1728, made changes in the political structure and drew up a formal organization plan. The Qing now restored the Dalai Lama as ruler leading government called Kashag[33] but elevated the role of Amban to include more direct involvement in Tibetan internal affairs. At the same time the Qing took steps to counterbalance the power of the aristocracy by adding officials recruited from the clergy to key posts.[34]

China was going through tumultuous period. I think one of the Kashmiri/Panjabi ruler had annexed part of Tibet, in 1800s or so and was later on repulsed by main Chinese force. They had given Tibet autonomy but kept it as a part of China.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

I am not talking about present but before 1962 war as China said that any such treaty is null and void because rest of China was not taken into account.Sounds so stupid ,doesnt it??

You were the one who recognized Tibet as a part of China.

Which means if you want to negotiate on the border, you have to do it with China, not with Tibetan separatists.

Easy. If you didn't want to do that, why did you recognize Tibet as a part of China?

 

[Kloitra]

You were the one who recognized Tibet as a part of China.

Which means if you want to negotiate on the border, you have to do it with China, not with Tibetan separatists.

Easy. If you didn't want to do that, why did you recognize Tibet as a part of China?

That was diplomatic stupidity of Nehru. He could have used it as a leverage.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

That was diplomatic stupidity of Nehru. He could have used it as a leverage.

Exactly.

Nehru recognized Tibet as a part of China, then he went behind our backs and hosted the Tibetan Government in Exile, after their failed violent armed uprising in 1959.

Where is the consistency?

 

[Genesis]

Thats possible,and forego our claims to aksai chin.Interestingly though china has no problems with us giving refuge,just any political support for the movement.And increasingly indian circles understand this fait accompli too.

Not saying kick out all the Tibetans, they are more or less Indians now and kicking them out would be cruel and unrealistic, it would really reflect badly on all sides.

The Lama having India gives him options, and him having no options would put him at the negotiating table. It may not even come to the kicking out. Just force him to the table and accept our terms, which is generous considering, what we are really offering is treating them as minorities, with benefits, but also as citizens as China, meaning same law and restrictions in most cases.

Ok guys after going through the thread,i have one question.Some of the Chinese posters are saying that British India and Tibet gov. demarcated border without taking rest of China into account.My question is why we should have taken China into account when China was not present as a country at that time??

See that's not the right way to look at it.

That would be like saying During Vichy France or fall of one of France's republics or empires, that a part of France was negotiated away because of a temporary weakness in government.

In most cases, these borders are recognized because of continued weakness, but China has regained great power status, and thus we don't recognize a line that didn't involve us.


So two things, one is it's a temporary weakness and we are now a great power and what we say goes. While you case could be argued, in the world of great power politics, precedent and current power are the most important elements.

 

[Janmejay]

You were the one who recognized Tibet as a part of China.

This logic is correct after we recognized it as your part of territory not before it.I am just asking on what basis China said that the agreement bw Tibet gov. and British India is null and void??

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

This logic is correct after we recognized it as your part of territory not before it.I am just asking on what basis China said that the agreement bw Tibet gov. and British India is null and void??

Nehru recognized Tibet as a part of China in the 1950's.

So he shot himself in the foot, didn't he? How can you negotiate with Tibetan separatists on the issue of China's territory?

 

[Kloitra]

Exactly.

Nehru recognized Tibet as a part of China, then he went behind our backs and hosted the Tibetan Government in Exile, after their failed violent armed uprising in 1959.

Where is the consistency?

They (Nehru and comp) probably saw Dalai Lama as a religious leader more than political one. Religion is very sensitive issue in India, and general perception is that Buddhist are very peaceful. Though his entire foreign policy seems part utopian part mind boggling.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

They (Nehru and comp) probably saw Dalai Lama as a religious leader more than political one. Religion is very sensitive issue in India, and general perception is that Buddhist are very peaceful. Though his entire foreign policy seems part utopian part mind boggling.

The Tibetan Government in Exile already admitted to the New York Times that it was engaged in violent activities against China, even after the 1959 armed uprising.

New York Times - Dalai Lama Group Says It Got Money From C.I.A.

The Dalai Lama's administration acknowledged today that it received $1.7 million a year in the 1960's from the Central Intelligence Agency, but denied reports that the Tibetan leader benefited personally from an annual subsidy of $180,000.

The money allocated for the resistance movement was spent on training volunteers and paying for guerrilla operations against the Chinese, the Tibetan government-in-exile said in a statement.

After 1959 they were hosted in India. And according to their own statement, they were conducting guerrilla operations against China during the 1960's.

 

[Janmejay]

See that's not the right way to look at it.

That would be like saying During Vichy France or fall of one of France's republics or empires, that a part of France was negotiated away because of a temporary weakness in government.

In most cases, these borders are recognized because of continued weakness, but China has regained great power status, and thus we don't recognize a line that didn't involve us.


So two things, one is it's a temporary weakness and we are now a great power and what we say goes. While you case could be argued, in the world of great power politics, precedent and current power are the most important elements.

Ok i got your point but if we go by this logic Turks and Arabs can claim whole of Northern part of India and whole Pakistan becasue they ruled it at one point of time or India can claim whole of Pakistan just because some ruler from India ruled whole of Pakistan in history or Japan can claim some Parts of China because they controlled it even though for small time!!!