Tibet and Indian Realpolitik Interests
09 Jun, 1999 · 198
Senthil Ram says India will definitely get the support of the West if it talks about the suppression of human rights and cultural genocide in Tibet
The chain of errors in
India
’s
China
policy started with
New Delhi
’s failure to challenge the Chinese occupation of
Tibet
. The present strategic developments in
Tibet
is very dangerous for Indian security interests. The lack of any tangible progress in resolving the Indo-China border dispute shows that the problem lies elsewhere. An overview of the Indo-China relations of the past fifty years shows how the Indians were trapped by the Chinese realist policies. In light of the present changes at the international and regional level, will it be possible for
India
to revise its
China
policies?
Beijing
. But, the Chinese policies clearly shows that
Tibet
is central in their strategies and actions aimed at
India
. Chinese strategic interests in
Tibet
with regard to
India
prove this point. One, by making
Tibet
an integral part of
China
they can claim Indian territories and settle the border dispute with the help of Tibetan documents. Two, denying
Tibet
as an autonomous buffer zone for ensuring Indian security along the 3200 km. Himalayan boundary will challenge
India
’s regional supremacy in
South Asia
. The Indian acquiescence to Chinese imperialism led to the tragedy of 1962, the loss of Akasai Chin and the continuing dispute over the border.
China
on two levels. First, the idealist Indian policy itself helped
China
to gain a strong basis in its dispute with
India
.
India
was the first democratic country to recognize communist
China
,
India
legitimized Chinese occupation of
Tibet
,
India
sponsored
China
’s UN membership and stood by
Beijing
in all the resolutions that condemned the latter. Second, the realist Chinese policy makers cleverly manipulated Indian policies to support their hegemonic claims.
China
signed the 1954 Panchsheel agreement to make Tibet China’s internal issue, and get Indian recognition. Chinese also used
India
’s anti-imperialist rhetoric to denounce the Mc Mahon Line signed between imperialist
British India
and
Tibet
, which defined Indian border claims.
China
and gained nothing. On the contrary it allowed the Chinese to promote their political and military objective. Now the time has come to revise our
China
policy and deny its hegemonic claims. In the first place there is a grave need to remove the fear psychosis in the minds of the Indian elite and politicians about the Chinese capacity to demonstrate its military muscle. The Chinese created this fear by maintaining its relationship with
New Delhi
in a state of uncertainty. The deployment of nuclear weapons in
Tibet
exacerbated this syndrome. Moreover the present
China
policy cannot solve our border dispute or gain peace and tranquility in the border areas. Our foreign policy is an official endorsement of the Chinese action in. Revising our
China
policy is the only way to save and the credibility of our foreign policy.
Tibet
is the core issue for
China
it is doubly so for
India
, because it is the heart of the territorial dispute with
China
. The Chinese military mobilization in
Tibet
is the most serious problem impinging the Indian security.
India
cannot defend the boundary it claims except by supporting Tibetan autonomy. The hard reality is that no country will today jeopardize the entire panoply of its relations with
China
for the sake of
Tibet
. But, if we consider the new strategic and political realities of the international and regional scene, making
Tibet
an important factor in our
China
policy would be and perfectly legitimate.
China
policy- because the justification for Pokhran II was the Chinese nuclear threat. In that case expressing support for Tibetan autonomy could be a strategically suitable change in
China
policy. On the international level, if the West, particularly
America
can send cruise missiles to support the Kosovar separatist, there is nothing to prevent them from helping the Tibetans.
India
will definitely get the support of the West if it talks about the suppression of human rights and cultural genocide in
Tibet
.
India
should not miss this opportunity to gain legitimacy for its realpolitik interests.
The Indian policy makers downplay the Tibetan factor in the belief that they can not afford another war or a significant increase in tensions with
Indian policies favoured
This fifty years of Indian appeasement policy towards
If
The credibility of Indian nuclear deterrence is directly linked to its