Sino-Indian Border Issue
Sino-Indian Border Issue
Ahmad Reza Taheri , YC-NISDA, PUNE, 09 Oct 2009: On 9th October 2009, YC- National Center of International Security & Defense Analysis organized a seminar titled "Chinese Incursions on Sino-Indian border – A Strategic Analysis", at the center, University of Pune. The seminar was attended by distinguished army officials and Indian academicians. It was covered by the media.
Professor Dalvi (director of the center) welcomed the participants. The first session chaired by Professor Ram Bapat (a Pune based political scientist). The meeting was followed by three presentations, in the following way.
Major General (retd) V. K. Madhok (the former director general of Territorial Army & a writer) based on his own experience as a commander in defensive operations at the high ranks of the army, talked on "has China surrounded & engaged India: Chinese incursions, current & future security threats." He briefly pointed about India and China's border disputes, saying that China does not regard Sikkim as a part of India. China has a great influence over her neighbors such as Burma. There is a saying that Burma's foreign policy is determined in Beijing. China can support the separatist movements against India. Chinese are very active in the economic sphere; they are working on huge projects in Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, and Burma. He continued that Chinese nuclear arsenals are located in Tibet, while Indians have not taken any specific initiative. Madhok remarked that India, security wise, is in mess. We have six areas in India which are facing with border incursions from China. He followed some other developments, such as the remarks of different Indian authorities on the issue. He also pointed that Chinese want to test Indian reactions. They want to dictate their own terms and want to contain India. And, they can do so by supporting Pakistan against India. China wants to increase further her naval bases in the neighboring countries. Whereas, India has always been slow. For example, on economic terms, Sri Lanka offered India 4000 crores on a road project, which was refused by India. The offer was accepted by China; around 400 Chinese are working on the project. At the end of his presentation, Madhok presented some options for India to deal with the situation, by pointing the following: India should speed up its logistic infrastructure, give priority to the indigenization, redefine her terms of engagement with China, decide her policy with Burma, re-organize paramilitary forces, respect the prestige of the army forces, and redefine her nuclear policy.
Air Marshal Narayan Menon (retd) briefly discussed the "India-China border issues: strategic implications & impact of air power". Much of the border between India and China has not been clearly marked either actually on ground or in maps authenticated by both nations. India claims 40,000 square km of territory currently under Chinese control. This is in the Aksai Chin area adjacent to the state of Jammu & Kashmir. China too claims nearly 90,000 sq km of Indian territory, including the entire state of Arunachal Pradesh. In 2008, there have been nearly 70 incursions by the Chinese into Indian territory, mainly in Sikkim. Menon continued with the issue of China's power, saying that China's push to become a global power is based on a modern interpretation of Sun Tzu's classic theories in his Art of War authored between 8th and 5th century BC. The book deals with the strategies of war; it says that "all warfare is based on deception". Whereas, the strategic lessons India has learnt from its previous wars or international engagements lie locked in 'Top Secret' cupboards and Indian strategists and military analysts are denied opportunities to study the past and bring out lessons for the future. According to him, Indian decision makers are reluctant to consult groups/individuals outside the government to obtain inputs and views that would defiantly improve the quality of our actions. All democracies, even Chinese government, obtain inputs from 'think-tanks', universities and other concerned organizations. He also said that India does not spend sufficiently on the army. It spends only $ 20 billion annually on its military, while China's budget is $ 120 billion. The Chinese, unlike their western counterparts, do not subscribe to the theory that the longer range guns, better tanks, airpower or higher levels of technology alone would contribute to winning the wars. To them strategy is more important than any other military attribute. In India there is no trust between political leadership and military, this is the problem. Both military and intelligence should play a role in the decision making process.
The third speaker was Dr. M L Sali (Reader & Head of the Department of Defense & Strategic Studies of Bhonsala Military College, Nashik). He followed the historical developments of border dispute between China and India, since the ancient period. He pointed that China has sorted out her border disputes with Pakistan, with the former USSR, with Burma, but not with India, why? It is because China does not want to see India's progress.
Finally, the participants were allowed to take part in the discussion by asking several questions from the speakers. Professor Bapat concluded the seminar with his remarks, saying that India lacks a strategic culture to develop a grand strategy. He also commented that China too faces its own problems and it is not to say that Chinese are perfect. But again, we should not have a wishful thinking about this.
At the end of the seminar, I asked two questions/suggestions; one to Major General Madhok and the other to Dr. Sali. I asked General Madhok, "in terms of foreign economic policy China has been more successful than India. For example, you yourself have mentioned about Chinese investments in Pakistan, Burma, etc. Now, the question is that why Chinese are so flexible, while Indians are not? Of course, let me tell you that there may be three answers to the question such as: a lack of involvement of military and intelligence in the decision making process; lack of will on the part of political leadership; and democracy which can slow the decision making process. Apart from these three factors, are there other reasons?" Well, he considered the three above mentioned issues as a part of the answer, but he also added that we are in need of an effective political leadership. I asked Dr. Sali that his remark on "China's will of occupying Indian territory is because (several reasonable factors presented by him) China wants to have more living space for his huge population", may not be considered a concrete reason.
People in the picture from left: Ahmad Reza Taheri, Vinayak Lashkar (M.Phil), Dr. N K Kumar, Dr. Shivram Shinde.
Ahmad Reza Taheri, Research Associate at the YC- National Center for International Security & Defense Analysis, University of Pune.
Madhok was addressing a seminar on Chinese incursions into Indian territory' organised by the Yashwantrao Chavan National Centre for International Security and Defence Analysis (YC-NISDA) at the University of Pune.
Air Marshal (retd) Narayan Menon from Bangalore and M L Sali, head of the department of defence and strategic studies at the Bhonsla Military School, Nashik, were among the prominent speakers at the event.
The overall opinion that evolved at the meet was for precaution on the part of both India and China to see that problems along the Sino-Indian borders do not go out of proportion and acquire a situation of full-scale confrontation.
Madhok initiated the discussion by giving his overview of Has China surrounded and engaged India: Chinese incursions, intentions, current and future security threats'. He said, "The recent developments were far too serious cause of concern for the Indian armed forces because ultimately it will be the forces who will face the brunt."
Citing contradictions in the statements emanating from the armed forces and the Indian defence and external affairs ministries, Madhok wondered why the government was in an appeasement mode whereas India ought to be more aggressive in taking up issues with China.
He said, "Why are we reluctant to ruffle the Chinese feathers by not talking about the problems of Uighurs in the Xing Jiang province, the human rights violation in Tibet and the billions worth of investment by China in areas such as Gilgit and Baltistan."
Madhok said, "Instances of direct on ground incursions, which can be seen, have gone up steadily since 2006 and each year, they have numbered around 140-plus. Even in the instant case, the incursions that happened in June/July came to light through the media as late as in September and still we have contradictory statements from Indian authorities. India is reacting mildly to the situation."
According to Madhok, "Indian government ought to issue clear cut orders to the troops as to what is needed to be done in the case of incursions, rather than be in an appeasement mode. The present political leadership wants to take the easy way out by passing the problem to the next generation."
Madhok said, "The need is for strengthening the armed forces by way of supplementary units like a largely expanded territorial army as well as having a reservist military officers corps. This is critical considering that India faces 14,000-odd shortage of officers in the armed forces." Indigenization of defence equipment and having a comprehensive national security doctrine was essential, he said.
On China surrounding India, Madhok said, "The Sino-Indian border dispute over Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim remains unresolved; China has kept alive its dispute with Bhutan; Nepal has gone the communists way and the Chinese interests in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Tibet can hardly be ignored."
Air Marshal Menon, speaking on the border issues and impact of air power, said that Indian air strike power was needed to be enhanced in a large way considering that Indian air force is only 1/3rd of its Chinese counterpart. "China has already started making combat aircraft of their own based on Russian technology," he pointed out. "The one bright spot that can be seen is the operationalisation of the airfields in the Ladakh region," he said.
Bhonsla Sali traced the history of the Sino-Indian border dispute by going into the geographical aspects of the dispute, starting with China's takeover of Tibet.
A S Dalvi, head of YC- NISDA, and senior academician Ram Bapat chaired the discussion sessions.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/pune/India-must-redefine-engagement-with-China/articleshow/5107590.cms
