China and India conflict hampers Bangladesh’s interest

Dr. Enayet Karim: Pandit Nehru, India’s first and later 3-term prime minister, was first elected 3 times. After the Second World War, the world was divided into two circles. Pandit Nehru was involved in maintaining a distance from both circles as a pioneer of the Non-Aligned Movement – but could not remain so. He did not complete his third term. Being non-aligned, Pandit Nehru was neutral due to US and CIA activities around Tibbet, could not stay in power.
The supposed ruler and religious guru of Tibet (TonvinGyasto) known to the world as the Dalai Lama took refuge in what was then NEFA, now Arunachal Pradesh and later in India, on March 17, 1959 to ebb and flow in warmth and amity with the ‘very friendly’ neighbor India.
Ekdar’s ‘Hindi-Chinese Bhai Bhai’ tensions arose over the historical rights of the border, known as the Johnson Line to the west and the McMahon Line to the east, as determined by the British Raj.
Tensions ranged from border tensions to military conflict. In 1960, the then Prime Minister of China,the Third World leader Zhou En Lai visited Delhi in the context of the Tibetan issue arising in the context of de-escalating border disputes, particularly the tense situation on the western border, and the entire inter-state border, including the eastern border, in an acceptable (?) and solvable manner. But Pandit Nehru rejected the proposal due to the high demand of experts of the Indian Prime Minister at that time. After that, due to some ambitious consultants of India, there was a bloody war between the two countries for about 1 month.
Aksai Chin in Ladakh in the west and the then NEFA in present Arunachal across the McMahon Line in the east (October 20th-November 21st 1962) China captured 38,000 square kilometers of Aksai Chin on the western front and the eastern on the border, occupying Tezpur in Assam declared a unilateral ceasefire and withdrew the army.
India’s losses in that war were many times higher than China’s. Aksai China remains under Chinese occupation to this day. The border line is drawn along the Line of Actual Control (LAC). India’s massive defeat in that 1962 war has been a cause of emotional pain not only for Pandit Nehru but for India to this day. The consequences of that war and the psychological trauma are reflected in India’s foreign and military policy today. Even now India’s geopolitics and foreign policy are revolving in the wake of the 1962 disaster. Indian diplomats and politicians alike have acknowledged that the issue has become a psychological issue for India. In this context, after the conflict with China in the Galwan Valley in 2020, Indian Home Minister Amit Shah said that India would sacrifice the last drop of blood to recover the land occupied by China and Pakistan (Azad Kashmir and Northern Areas).
Although China is India’s largest country in bilateral trade and cooperation with China in various fields including international law, the Sino-Indian border dispute is becoming more and more complicated. Apart from Aksai China occupied by China, parts of present-day Arunachal and Assam in northeastern India have not historically been withdrawn from Tibet’s external claims. Historically, Arunachal (once NEFA) was part of China before 1914 and at that time China did not ratify the Shimla Treaty – almost reminiscent of India at times. Not only to remember, China has renamed this province as Siang and at the same time 30 places in the region have been renamed after historical Tibet or China. On the other hand, the Indian Army has also said that unlike China, the name of the region will be changed to their own.
China didn’t just stop at the name change; In March 2024, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi strongly protested the visit of the region, saying that the region is part of China. In response, India has reminded China that the province and territory are an integral part of India. Earlier, India had protested against issuing visas on separate papers to 3 players from the region who were participating in the ‘World University Games’Washu (a type of Chinese martial art game) in Chengdu, China in 2023. Through this, China wanted to convey the message that the region is disputed.
The lessons learned by India from the 1962 war led to the deployment of more troops and military equipment in the region and the use of movement. At the same time, the establishment of the Siliguri Corridor or ‘Chicken Neck’ has greatly improved supply lines. However, the question remains that since Doklam, the region is highly vulnerable and under China’s direct surveillance. Alternative and safe emergency supply routes are needed. Indian geographers are looking for this way. It is to be remembered that in the first hours of the Sino-Indian war of 1962, the 7th Brigade of the Indian Army (October 22, 1962) was destroyed and taken prisoner of war along with the brigade commander, Brigadier John Dalvi. (1) Due to the position of East Pakistan at that time and Pakistan’s non-cooperation, the troops were in dire straits from rear to supply.
The history of the Dalai Lama, Tibet and the Indo-China (Tibet) border crisis in the context of the Sino-Indian War of 1962 to highlight the geopolitical context of the region. Currently, the United States is desperate to stop the rise of China as a world power.
In the context of the Indian Ocean and South Asia region, the origin of the Indo-Pacific and the Quad (QUAD) and the emergence of India as a major power were also instrumental in the US. India is the only power in the region which is considered to be the source of counter power to China in the Indian Ocean and also shares a 3,488 km distance with China to the north. India’s largest border. Currently, the definition of one China in the geopolitical context is sensitive to two issues.
Even after India’s annexation and annexation of Sikkim in 1975, India had an unwritten understanding with China that India had somehow reconciled the issue of Tibet and the alleged authority and claims of the Dalai Lama of Tibet. At least in 1979, after the visit of the then Foreign Minister, (later Prime Minister) to Beijing, there was an indication of the end of the tension over the Tibet issue. Even in the international arena, the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan government in his so-called exile have not been very vocal on the issue. The establishment of US relations with China in 1971 was based on the one China policy by the US which included Tibet and non-Tibet regions.
However, no matter how dormant the issue may have been in the past, in the past few years the United States has tried to raise the issue of Tibet again against China. Because of which China’s relations with not only the United States but also with India have become tense. The proof of this is the limited conflict between the two countries in Galwan Valley in 2020. On the other hand, China-India-US potential complex geopolitics and conflict around Tibet is evidenced by a 7-member panel of both parties of the United States Congress, led by Republican Michael McCaul, along with former House Speaker and Democrat Nancy Pelosi, from June 16 to 20, 2024. Pelosi visits India. First met the Tibetan leader the Dalai Lama and members of his so-called government at Dharamshala. Passed on June 12, 2024, the Resolve Tibet Act – (Resolve Tibet Act) – This newly approved law by both houses of the United States calls on China to open the door to renegotiate the autonomy and sovereignty of Tibet with the Dalai Lama, and in the wake of this, the United States of Tibet,The alleged expatriate will maintain cooperation with the government.
China reacted angrily to the interview with the Dalai Lama and the new US policy on Tibet. Meanwhile, the US high-powered team met India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who was sworn in for the third time on June 20, 2024, and informed about the new law. The re-appointed foreign minister said after the interview that the US will maintain a very strong strategic friendship and all kinds of cooperation. It should be noted that although Narendra Modi is the third term Prime Minister, he is the head of the United Front government and will continue for the next 5 years. At the beginning of his journey, he opened the way for renewed tension with China indirectly in the context of the changed Tibet policy of the United States.
On the other hand, both sides have been increasing their strength along the Arunachal border for the past several years. The tension is expected to escalate into a border conflict during Narendra Modi’s third term,like Nehru’s third term in 1962. But this time according to India, they are ready to give an equal response to China. Geographical reasons require India to develop and secure more secure alternative supply routes opposite the so-called Chicken Neck or Siliguri Corridor. For this reason, guaranteeing the supply route with the cooperation of Bangladesh. In this case, what will be the position of Bangladesh in the event of a possible conflict on the eastern border between China and India is not only a geo-strategic but also an important issue for geo-politicians to think about.