An Analysis on PRC claims over Arunachal Pradesh (South Tibet)

                      An Analysis on PRC claims over Arunachal Pradesh (South Tibet)

 Map of Arunachal Pradesh

Introduction

Arunachal Pradesh is located in the far northeast. Itanagar is the capital of the state. It borders the states of Assam and Nagaland to the south, and shares international borders with Burma in the east, Bhutan in the west, and the People's Republic of China in the north.

Arunachal Pradesh means "land of the dawn-lit mountains"

The majority of the territory is claimed by the People's Republic of China as part of South Tibet. The northern border of Arunachal Pradesh reflects the McMahon Line, a controversial 1914 treaty between the United Kingdom and a Tibetan government, which was never accepted by the Chinese government, and not enforced, by the Indian government until 1950.

Background

In 1913-1914 representatives of China, Tibet and Britain negotiated a treaty in India: the Shimla Accord. This treaty's objective was to define the borders between Inner and Outer Tibet as well as between Outer Tibet and British India. British administrator, Sir Henry McMahon, drew up the 550 miles (890 km) McMahon Line as the border between British India and Outer Tibet during the Shimla Conference. The Tibetan and British representatives at the conference agreed to the line, which ceded Tawang and other Tibetan areas to the British Empire. The Chinese representative had no problems with the border between British India and Outer Tibet, however on the issue of the border between Outer Tibet and Inner Tibet the talks broke down. Thus, the Chinese representative refused to accept the agreement and walked out. The Tibetan Government and British Government went ahead with the Shimla Agreement and declared that the benefits of other articles of this treaty would not be bestowed on China as long as it stays out of the purview. The Chinese position was that Tibet was not independent from China, so Tibet could not have independently signed treaties and per the Anglo-Chinese (1906) and Anglo-Russian (1907) conventions, any such agreement was invalid without Chinese assent.

Shimla was initially rejected by the Government of India as incompatible with the 1907 Anglo-Russian Convention. However, this agreement (Anglo-Russian Convention) was renounced by Russia and Britain jointly in 1921, thus making the Shimla Conference official However, with the collapse of Chinese power in Tibet the line had no serious challenges as Tibet had signed the convention, therefore it was forgotten to the extent that no new maps were published until 1935, when interest was revived by civil service officer Olaf Caroe. The Survey of India published a map showing the McMahon Line as the official boundary in 1937.In 1938, the British finally published the Shimla Convention as a bilateral accord two decades after the Shimla Conference; in 1938 the Survey of India published a detailed map showing Tawang as part of NEFA (North-East Frontier Agency). In 1944 Britain established administrations in the area, from Dirang Dzong in the west to Walong in the east. Tibet, however, altered its position on the McMahon Line in late 1947 when the Tibetan government wrote a note presented to the newly independent Indian Ministry of External Affairs laying claims to the Tibetan district (Tawang) south of the McMahon Line. The situation developed further as India became independent and the People's Republic of China was established in 1949. With the PRC poised to take over Tibet, India unilaterally declared the McMahon Line to be the boundary in November 1950, and forced the last remnants of Tibetan administration out of the Tawang area in 1951.The PRC has never recognized the McMahon Line, and claims Tawang on behalf of Tibetans. The 14th Dalai Lama, who led the Tibetan government from 1950 to 1959, was quoted in 2003 as saying that Tawang was "actually part of the Tibetan administration" before the Simla Accord. He clarified his position in 2008, saying that as far as Tibet was concerned "Tawang is part of India"

                 Fig: Disputed Area known as Arunachal Pradesh or China claimed South Tibet

Shimla Agreement

In 1913, the British convoked a conference at Shimla, India to discuss the issue of Tibet's status. The conference was attended by representatives of the British Empire, the newly founded Republic of China, and the Tibetan government at Lhasa. The British plenipotentiary, Sir Henry McMahon, introduced the plan of dividing Tibetan-inhabited areas into "inner Tibet" and "outer Tibet" and apply different policies. "Inner Tibet," includes Tibetan-inhabited areas in Qinghai, Gansu, Sichuan and Yunnan provinces, would be under the jurisdiction of the Chinese government. "Outer Tibet," covering approximately the same area as the modern "Tibet Autonomous Region" would enjoy autonomy. A boundary between Tibet and British India, later called the McMahon Line, was drawn on a map referred to in the treaty.

The Tibetan Indian boundary was negotiated in Shimla between representatives from British and Tibet, in the presence of the Chinese representative. During the Shimla conference a map of the Tibetan Indian border was provided as an annex to the proposed agreement.

The Schedule appended to the Accord contained further notes. For example, it was to be understood that "Tibet forms part of Chinese territory" and after the Tibetans selected a Dalai Lama, the Chinese government was to be notified and the Chinese commissioner in Lhasa would "formally communicate to His Holiness the titles consistent with his dignity, which have been conferred by the Chinese Government"; that the Tibetan government appointed all officers for "Outer Tibet", and that "Outer Tibet" was not to be represented in the Chinese Parliament or any such assembly.

Negotiations failed when China and Tibet could not agree over the Sino-Tibetan boundary. After the Chinese plenipotentiary, Ivan Chen, withdrew from the convention, the British and Tibetan plenipotentiaries attached a note denying China any privileges under the agreement and signed it as a bilateral accord. At the same time the British and Lochen Shatra signed a fresh set of trade Regulations to replace those of 1908.

The McMohan Line

The line is named after Sir Henry McMahon, foreign secretary of British India and the chief negotiator of the convention. It extends for 550 miles (890 km) from Bhutan in the west to 160 miles (260 km) east of the great bend of the Brahmaputra River in the east, largely along the crest of the Himalayas. Shimla (along with the McMahon Line) was initially rejected by the British-run Government of India as incompatible with the 1907 Anglo-Russian Convention. This convention was renounced in 1921. After Shimla, the McMahon Line was forgotten until 1935, when British civil service officer Olaf Caroe convinced the government to publish the Shimla Convention and use the McMahon Line on official maps.

The McMahon Line is regarded as the legal national border of India it is lacking only the final process of joint demarcation. The Dalai Lama's Tibetan government-in-exile also accepts the line as an official border.

Fig: 1914 McMohan Line map, The same was officially signed between Tibet and British Govts.

Chinese View over Shimla Accord

China rejects the Shimla Accord, contending that the Tibetan government was not sovereign and therefore did not have the power to conclude treaties. Chinese maps show some 56,000 square miles (150,000 km2) of the territory south of the line as part of the Tibet Autonomous Region, popularly known as South Tibet in China. Chinese forces briefly occupied this area during the Sino-Indian War of 1962-63. China does recognize a Line of Actual Control which includes a portion of the McMahon line in the eastern part of its border with India, according to a 1959 diplomatic note by Prime Minister Zhou Enlai. The Chinese claims have been varying in last five decades. These claims vary from major part of Arunachal Pradesh to Whole Arunachal Pradesh.

Detailed eight miles to the inch scaled McMahon Line map of 24–25 March 1914 is signed only by the Tibetan and British representatives. This map and McMahon Line negotiations were both done without Chinese participation, although the Chinese counter part was present during the discussion.

PRC interests in Arunachal Pradesh

The Chinese claims over Arunachal Pradesh are not very clear these claim have been varying over the last five decades.

Arunachal Pradesh geographically difficult region so far the economical advantages are concerned the area only contain the untapped potential of Hydro-electric power, currently some 27 project had started in Arunachal by many Indian Companies in collaboration with Arunachal Pradesh government. the estimates says that the potential of more than 27000 MW hydro-electricity is available with the state. The region in neither rich state in terms of minerals nor it contains any untapped potential of oil or natural gases.

During the 1962 war china occupied most of Arunachal Pradesh (North-East Fortier Agency). The same occupied area was returned back to India after the ceasefire and withdrawal of Chinese forces from the area.

Latest trend of PRC foreign policies

Currently the PRC territorial claims and policies are more based on the requirements to sustain the economic growth of nation rather than to revive old claims of the disputed territories such as Arunachal Pradesh.

The People's Republic of China (PRC) ranks as the world's second largest economy after the United States. It has been the world's fastest-growing major economy, with consistent growth rates of around 10% over the past 30 years. China is also the largest exporter and second largest importer of goods in the world. The country's per capita GDP (PPP) was $7,544 (International Monetary Fund, 94th in the world) in 2010. Since the Area such as Arunachal Pradesh are not as economically lucrative and welcoming as South China Sea and Its Island, the PRC claims for these areas are not so intense. The claims are extension of the Chinese claims over Tibet Autonomous Region since these claims are based on the claims of old Tibetan government for the area of TAWANG and other part of Arunachal Pradesh.

The difficult terrain, poor transport infrastructure and difficulty to access the internal and remotely located area make these Chinese claims weaker. these weaker claims are followed by dearth of economical Interest and returns. Arunachal had been part of India for more than 110 year by now which also abolish the Chinese interests over Arunachal. Although if the PRC claims over Arunachal were so intense the withdrawal of the Chinese forces after the occupation of major parts of Arunachal had not been taken place immediately after 1962 Military campaign.

Conclusion

With all these points above it may be concluded that the claims of Arunachal Pradesh by China are not as serious as they have been exaggerated for past five decades. Today PRC is more interested in the area which can support it growing economy instead of being liabilities against its development. Moreover the Chinese Claims on Arunachal Pradesh may be taken as a point to create pressure on our (Indian) government.