The Sikkim standoff is a war of words, not a war
Despite the ratcheting up of tensions by the Chinese ambassador to India, New Delhi should be patient
China’s Ambassador to India Luo Zhaohui expressed his belligerent stance that there can be “no compromise” and that the “ball is in India’s court” in resolving the nearly three-week-old standoff at the Sikkim-Tibet- Bhutan borders. In the light of the G20 summit meeting at Hamburg this week and where Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Xi Jinping are expected to meet, his comments appear to be part of a diplomatic hard-ball being played by China.
Since Chinese efforts to construct a road in the Bhutanese-claimed area closer to Sikkim began, the situation is snowballing into a war of words, if not a war in reality. Yet, despite ratcheting up by the Chinese side, we can only expect some flashes in the pan.
First, while a British Indian-Qing Dynasty Convention of March 1890 outlines a border treaty between Sikkim and Tibet along the watershed principle, no demarcation of territories was made subsequently. The areas of the current stand-off in Sikkim-Bhutan areas were never formalised. As the area is at the trijunction of three countries, Indian consent is necessary for finalising a border treaty.
The Chinese argument that Indian Army had “intruded” into its territory was con- tested by the Bhutanese government on June 20. The Bhutanese also countered that Beijing was violating the 1988 and 1998 understanding on status quo. China has also been selective by citing the 1890 treaty while terming the 1914 McMohan Line as “unequal”. Such selective arguments are bound to weaken Chinese positions in the short term.
Second, invoking the special relations between India and Bhutan, Indian troops stopped the Chinese from building a road in the contested territories of Bhutan and China. For India, the building of a Chinese road with military back-up in Chumbi valley has security consequences for the vulnerable Siliguri Corridor. Such brazen actions by China are matched by the Indian resolve to protect its interests. Still, it is only expected that the current stand-off then will fizzle out with stiff Indian resistance. The rhetoric on the Chinese side has taken a turn towards escalation. Their foreign ministry spokesperson’s comments on July 3 suggested Indian troops are “trespassing” into China’s territory!”
China’s recent statements on Singapore, Vietnam and Japan followed a similar pattern of psychological war and coercive diplomacy. In this backdrop, India needs to brace for more such rhetoric but to observe patience and perseverance. Not only does India need to further strengthen its ties with South Asian countries but also respond strategically, in the larger region of Asia at the diplomatic, economic and military levels.