ONLY THE NAIVE TRUST CHINA

ONLY THE NA?VE TRUST CHINA

By

Lt Gen PG Kamath (Veteran)

?

I really do not know when we will ever learn to distrust China intensely and instinctively. The World Population Review concludes that China is the most hated country in the world. We need to be aware that we are dealing with a unique and distinct breed called the ‘Communist Party of China,’ which has not told the truth since its inception in 1921. Lying is culturally acceptable in China, more so in diplomatic confabulations, where it is a rule.

While I do not want to belittle the present agreement that has been hammered out between the two countries seeking disengagement at Depsang and Demchak; however, it calls for a long and hard look. For the first time, the Chinese have agreed to the Indian proposal for allowing us to patrol in our own territory.? In the euphoria, we forget that the entire Aksai Chen is our sovereign territory and the so-called Chinese concessions to permit our patrols as well as its patrols in our area do not need applause but only need to recognise that for the first time, the Chinese have backtracked though temporarily from their plans to annex Depsang Plains and Demchak. Let us wait for the unfolding of Chinese shenanigans which are just waiting to happen.? I think the Army Chief was right in stressing that there is a trust deficit between the two armies.? It is a mild term; in fact, there is a ‘trust chasm’ that cannot be ever bridged by those with the most fertile imagination.? However, our Ministry of External Affairs which has been accustomed to building imaginary bridges on foundations of naivety and innocence fantasize on a peaceful border.??

Throughout Sino-Indian Relations, the latter has behaved like a na?ve school boy who has mastered the art of gullibility in trusting the Chinese. We have never learned from History nor will we ever learn. China has always used its instruments of deceit and subterfuge in international relations.? Their reassurances and signing pacts/treaties/MOUs mean nothing. Remember the famous adage; ‘Treaties are scraps of Papers’ that is generally applicable to all totalitarian powers; especially to the Chinese who are its accomplished practitioners.?

It is worthwhile to examine the last 75 years of Chinese chicanery.? On 7 Oct 1950 China invaded Tibet and annexed it by the end of that month.? A coerced agreement was signed with Tibet on 23 May 1951 known infamously as ‘The 17 Points Agreement.’? A young Dalai Lama was coerced to sign it under the intimidation of over forty thousand invading Chinese troops still in Tibet.? Nehru though taken aback and bewildered made some mild and diffident diplomatic noises. Hereafter, Nehru played out his appeasement strategy towards China which ended only in his death.? Irreparable damage was caused to our Nation that we not only lost a war but also nearly 42000 Sq. Kms of our sovereign territory.?? India which has its obsession with heroes has still failed to comprehend how his negative influence dented the integrity of our country.

On 29 April 1954, Nehru signed a Trade and Intercourse Agreement with Tibet (A Part of China). He appeased the Chinese by giving a thumbs up and formally recognising their annexation of Tibet. It was a monumental surrender of India’s interest by surrendering a strategic buffer country between the two nations. Why did not the Indian strategic thinkers not anticipate the Chinese design?? The blind trust of Nehru in China ensured that the three years of lead time we had as an independent nation before the Chinese annexed Tibet was squandered.

In the same protocol, the devotee of China alias Nehru also signed the Panchsheel Agreement where the two countries signed to abide by its clauses; Mutual Respect of sovereignty and territorial integrity, Mutual Non-aggression, Non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, and Equality & Mutual Benefit.? The next year, at Bandung the Panchsheel was flaunted again as a cornerstone of Ideal International Relations and signed by 29 Afro-Asian Countries.

A naive Nehru patted himself as an international statesman for integrating China with the international community and signing the landmark agreement.? Little did he know that the agreement was a lullaby for him to sleep in slumber discarding the advice of his Generals and further reinforcing his implicit blind and childlike trust in China.? A little thought, if China had meant to abide by the Panchsheel; why did it invade Tibet an independent country, in the first place?? Nehru was not only the PM but also the foreign minister hence his hubris forbade him from taking saner counsels from others.

Just imagine the irony; while a confident and jubilant Nehru was signing the Panchsheel Agreement, unknown to India, China had almost completed the construction of the G 219 Highway connecting Tibet with Xiangjiang through our territory of Aksai Chen. He must have looked as artless and acquiescent as his grandson while signing the MOU between the Indian National Congress and the Communist Party of China, four and a half decades later.? I think it runs in the family.

Within five years of signing the Panchsheel, the Chinese attacked Longju in Aug 1959.? The post was held by Assam Rifles where one soldier was killed and many wounded and the post was occupied by PLA.? The only thing Nehru could do was to write long letters to Chinese PM Zhouenlai, who derided his claims by further claiming the entire NEFA (now Arunachal Pradesh) and Aksai Chin. Why did not Nehru revoke the Trade and Protocol Treaty where he had accepted Tibet as a part of China? Of course; you ought to have asked him.?? If you go through the correspondence between the Disciple Nehru and his Guru Zhouenlai; one can feel the sheer helplessness of the former as the latter continues to rubbish his claims with contempt and scorn.? These have been vividly narrated in the book ‘India, China, and Tibet Triangle’ by Ram Gopal.?? The origin of much talked about ‘LAC of 1959’ that was given as an excuse by the Chinese for their invasion in 2020 owes its origin to the letter written by Zhouenlai on 7 Nov 1959 during one of the formal exchanges.??

However, Nehru refused to learn from his experience and continued to trust the Chinese implicitly and more resolutely till the coup de main was delivered in Oct 1962.? Nehru was going on a visit to Sri Lanka and he ordered the Indian Army to push back the Chinese.? He was so sure and adamant that the Chinese would not attack that he described the Chinese invasion as a stab in the back. It was corrected by MJ Akbar; It was a stab from the front. Nehru had only closed his eyes. The invasion occurred when the Panchsheel agreement with its all-high-sounding clauses was still in force.? Still, the Chinese have the gumption to celebrate its 70th Anniversary on 01 Jul 2024; thankfully, India stayed out of it in contrast to the 60th Anniversary where the Vice President of India represented the country. The hype of Panchsheel notwithstanding, the 1967 Nathula Clash and 1986-87 Sumdorong Chu standoff took place. In both these incidents Chinese were forced to abort their designs.

The ice was broken by Rajiv Gandhi when he visited Beijing in 1988.? Then there was a series of agreements by the Narasimha Rao Government in the nineties.? The Border Peace and Tranquillity Agreement in 1993 and Confidence Building Measures in 1996: This was followed up by Political Parameters and Guiding Principles for the Settlement of the India-China Border Question in 2005; three years later another agreement on Peaceful Coexistence, Strategic Communication and Economic Cooperation.? If these were not enough; in 2013 we signed a Border Defence Cooperation Agreement and cooperation on Trans-border rivers.? Thereafter, once Xi took reigns in China followed by PM Modi in India, the two met 18 times or more and were a big hit in establishing a personal rapport, or so it appeared.? It appeared that the relations took a new turn from the historical Chinese skullduggery to a more balanced and rational disposition.

It was at this juncture the Chinese showed their colours and came for their Annual Collective Training in Tibet in April 2020 after keeping India informed as per the CBM agreement between the two countries.? At the end of the collective training while de-induction was expected the PLA returned and advanced to occupy the so-called ‘1959 LAC’ that involved occupation of the ‘No Man Land’ between the two forces.? The usual explanation given that the LAC is not defined hence it is not possible to determine the extent of incursions does provide a partial but unconvincing explanation.

The real issue is that with so many agreements intact and so many personal meetings between the two leaders over a hundred meetings between the two NSAs, and foreign ministers and 31 Meetings under ‘Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination on India-China Border Affairs (WMCC), the Chinese still chose to continue with their chicanery; why?? Because; they knew that they could fool the guileless Indians who trusted the Chinese with unfounded intrepidity.?

With such a track record of the Chinese one must be a Nehru to believe that the Chinese have reformed themselves and there will be peace on the borders. Firstly, it was a grave mistake of our present policymakers to ask for disengagement from the Chinese.? It should be the Chinese who should have asked.? Chinese are content to keep their forces on the LAC as India is paying indirectly for the upkeep of their troops in Tibet with more than a hundred billion dollars in favourable trade balance.? Shame on Indian businessmen and those of our people who import and buy cheap and toxic Chinese goods. I do not know why our country is not passing legislation that countries which are hostile on borders will incur a heavier import duty.? It would go a long way in curbing imports from China but also in giving impetus to domestic manufacturers.

Anyway; let us come back to the point; what are the Chinese up to?? As per them, it was the largesse given to the Indians who were seeking disengagement for years and they have condescended to our long pending request.? The Indians with joy in their hearts, exuding gratefulness in their eyes have grasped their hands to normalise their relationship. This is the narrative paraded by the Chinese.

If I can fathom; how the Chinese mind is working; they would first satisfy themselves by saying that the incursions in 2020 were worth it as they have been able to enforce ‘No patrolling Zones’ on our side of the LAC at Galwan, Hot Spring and Gogra.? They have also ensured that we withdrew from the Kailash Range (Chushul Heights) in Feb 2021 which would have given us a tremendous strategic advantage; as a quid pro quo they withdrew from Finger Four to Sirijap; relatively an area of only tactical significance.? Meanwhile, they have been able to construct bridges across Pangong Tso which enables it to move and redeploy forces including armour from North to South cutting down their time for reaction.

What next: China would continue with their following designs on the LAC.

Frequent Patrolling incursions in Ladakh, Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh.? Protests by us would be responded perfunctorily without any change in the actions of his troops on the ground.

He would continue to have the terrain advantage to block our patrols to Depsang plains which we need to counter with sizeable troops stationed in situ. Otherwise, he would shut and open the tap at his whims and fancies. He would allow patrolling on one day and could deny the next day.? Local commanders would be involved in sorting out issues frequently and our MEA would probably take up the case with a protest note that has limited significance in their overall scheme of things.

He would continue to build infrastructure like roads, bridges, and helipads, and deploy surveillance radars and weapon emplacements to dominate the area to overwhelm our forces at short notice. We should be constantly looking forward to such possibilities and should have our assault teams do likewise in other areas should he do it in one area. We need to be proactive and open similar narratives by aggressively patrolling and ingressing in his area at different locations and posing similar tactical confrontations.? He should know any ingress from his side will be similarly responded with more serious ingress and incursions in other areas by the Indian Army.? Our Army is capable of doing the same provided political clearance is in place.?

He could send patrols to the Chushul Range clandestinely and if confronted would withdraw feigning ignorance.? He would wait for an opportunity to plant a permanent post on the range; thereafter initiate discussions with our Ministry of External Affairs to discuss, delay, procrastinate, obstruct, and would try to put the issue in cold thus giving permanency to his occupation.? He would then ask for an exchange of documents, taking time to study them and then present its documents to show that four hundred years before, the Qing ruler had a map (printed recently in the antic finish) showing Ladakh was a part of Tibet and claim the entire Ladakh as their territory.? They would follow up with a statement asking India to vacate the entire territory to safeguard international peace and ensure common prosperity for the people of both countries or waffle some such gibberish bromides.

India, under no circumstances, should de-induct our forces from Ladakh.? He has the terrain advantage to have sizeable acclimatised troops, as the Tibetan plateau and the high-altitude terrain extend to over 1500 km north of the LAC. Any troops if de-inducted by us would need three weeks of acclimatization before they are battle-ready.? Mark my words; China would ask for normalisation of relations and would ask for de-induction of troops. We should not fall into the trap as China’s credibility is running negative.

Remember the words of Spanish Philosopher George Santayana: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”? History has taught us the disastrous consequences of trusting China.? Let us be smart: Let us gradually find alternative supply chains sans China.? We should build economic and military capacities to sever the trade and energy routes of China through the Indian Ocean.?? Let us build strong alliances with the US, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, the Philippines, the EU, and Vietnam. Talk less with China and let our actions only speak. Let China sizzle in the sauce of her making.?? The Sino-Indian relations should find a new normal; not openly antagonistic but in a Cold War Freeze. Keep it guessing as to what we are up to.???

?

?