s*****n
发帖数: 1998 | 1 http://www.bhutannewsnetwork.com/2014/11/would-india-disrupt-bhutan-china-bo
rder-negotiations/
Indian Newspaper The Telegraph carried a front page article on the forth com
ing visit of the Indian President to Bhutan in its issue of 28th October,201
4. It says that the visit is about Indian anxiety on the progress of China B
hutan Border Talks. President Pranab Mukerjee arrives on7th and leaves on 8t
h November.2014. Would he demand Bhutan to obstruct border negotiations with
China?
India had been controlling the Sino Bhutan international boundary Talks thro
ugh its iron grip on Bhutan’s economic and communication dependence on Indi
a. The writer Charu Sudan Kasturi cites the case of India withdrawing subsid
ies in 2013 to warn Bhutan against normalising relation with China.
The China Bhutan Border Talks have been going on for decades. China has been
quite sincere and mostly positive in conducting the international boundary
negotiation with Bhutan. And Bhutan on the other hand has been trying to del
ay the progress for many years at the insistence of India. How long can Bhut
an defy the patience of China and to what national benefit? The next step af
ter signing international boundary agreement with China would be normalising
relationship between the two Countries.
And that is what India wants to stall or prevent. A diplomatic level relatio
nship with China would forever consolidate the sovereign status of Bhutan. B
hutan would no longer be easily available to act as political pawn or surrog
ate for India in sensitive international politics. That is a fact. However,
Bhutan’s corner stone foreign policy of friendship with India will not alte
r. India will remain Bhutan’s most desired benefactor. Geographical access,
language and social behaviour naturally bring Bhutan closer to India. So In
dia will be more dominant than China in Bhutan’s priority. At the other end
of the scale it would be suicidal to keep snubbing friendly overtures from
China.
Unfortunately India and many other Western Nations and their Allies in South
East Asia including Australia and Japan do not want China to develop progre
ssive relationship with Bhutan. On the other hand these same Countries have
gone all out to develop their own political and economic ties with China. So
they are not containing the influence of China in international affairs but
they are curtailing the progress of Bhutan. It is necessary that Bhutanese
Leaders counter the isolation of Bhutan from China by vested interests of In
dia and other pro Western groups of nations. Bhutan cannot be ” A Tool of I
rritant ‘ for anti- China forces.
The Telegraph article on the eve of the visit of President of India to Bhuta
n is a deliberate political attempt to misconstrue the facts about China Bhu
tan international boundary Talks. The article alleges that China is offering
more land to Bhutan at certain point of Sino-Bhutan border in exchange for
some adjustment at the Tri-junction border of India, Bhutan and China. This
is a a desperate strategy on part of India to thwart Sino Bhutan progress in
boundary Talks.
The actual fact is that India wants Bhutan to demand more land from China at
the Tri-junction. India is very well aware of the historical facts of Briti
sh Raj days in India. As much as the Kings and the Kingdom of Bhutan want to
comply with Indian dictate,historical facts cannot be changed by Bhutan. Th
e British Raj grabbed the Duars from Bhutan and made the Duars part of India
. The Tri-junction is part of annexed Duar region and part of it was sold by
British Raj to China Tibet after it was annexed from Bhutan.
Now how could Bhutan reclaim this portion of land from China when she cannot
reclaim her Duar regions from India? The Tri-junction is a strategic point
and neither India nor China would surrender even a square inch of their land
to each other or to Bhutan . If Bhutan continues to postpone the finalizati
on of international boundary with China,the King of Bhutan has to be aware t
hat the Kingdom will not get the relaxation that China had so far accorded o
n the disputed Sino Bhutan border. And history will reflect badly on the leg
acy of the so far much admired Wangchuck dynasty for testing, at the behest
of India, the extreme limit the benign policy of China towards Bhutan.
President Pranab Mukerjee is an accomplished leader of India. No one can cas
t doubts on his nationalistic insight and foresight especially on China and
India border dispute. He and another notable Political Leader of India late
hon’ble Shri Basu of Communist Party could have been the Prime Ministers of
India but for the obstructions from their own respective Parties. So he is
of the highest political calibre to understand that even without coming to B
hutan that Bhutan is in no position to take Chinese land to enhance the stra
tegic interest of India.
President Pranab Mukerjee was the then the Minister of External Affairs of I
ndia when the 4th King of Bhutan pleaded with India in 2006 for renegotiatio
n of 1949 Indo Bhutan Treaty. What concession did he consider for Bhutan? Wh
y was the clause regarding the Duars annuity payable by India to Bhutan remo
ved from the renegotiated Treaty? The Kingdom of Bhutan was obliged to forgo
its past losses in the bargain to regain authority over its present and fut
ure Sovereign Affairs. But in realty Bhutan lost out on the Duars annuity an
d India still insist on directing Bhutan’s external affairs. India even too
k the unprecedented step to intervene in the General Election of Bhutan in 2
013 as recorded in the Telegraph article.
When will India and Bhutan respect the spirit and the letter of the re-negot
iated Indo Bhutan Treaty that was in fact signed by the present President of
India and the present King of Bhutan in 2006.
Their Majesties the 5th King and the 4th King have all the respects and obed
ience of the Bhutanese people but how does India expect the Kings to overloo
k the security interest of their own Kingdom and people and continue delayin
g the settlement of China Bhutan international boundary.
India is an old and dear development benefactor of Bhutan. No Bhutanese can
discount this fact. However can any Bhutanese put his head in the mouth of t
he lion in the north at the roar of the tiger from the south? My own answer
is no even if the tiger does pose danger to my assumed secure position. Actu
ally without real sovereignty there cannot be secure position for anyone in
Bhutan; only a deluded sense of hanging on borrowed time and position.
The international Sino Bhutan boundary is being demarcated by two technical
survey teams of Bhutan and China. The Indo Bhutan international boundary in
the west and south of Bhutan was demarcated by the Survey General of India.
Bhutan and India are yet to resolve the international boundary in the East o
f Bhutan primarily because the Survey General of India could not arbitrarily
demarcate the boundary of Arunachal State which is also claimed by China. A
ccording to Chinese map of Bhutan, substantial land area of Bhutan is presen
tly occupied by the State of Arunachal. Would India be prepared to give back
Bhutanese land?
The paradox is that there are three maps of the Kingdom of Bhutan. One is In
dian version,the other is Chinese version and one that Bhutan adopted severa
l years back at the later stage of the reign of the 4th King. The ideal solu
tion would be for China to give to Bhutan whatever the Indian map shows as b
eing Bhutanese land along the Sino Bhutan boundary. And India should also gi
ve to Bhutan whatever land the Chinese map shows as Bhutanese land along the
Indo Bhutan boundary. As a gesture of goodwill to Bhutan’s two neighbours,
the King of Bhutan could advise the Bhutanese Parliament to sanction joint
patrolling with China along Sino Bhutan international boundary and joint pat
rolling with India along Indo Bhutan international boundary. That way both C
hina and India would not be aggrieved for accepting both the version of Bhut
anese international boundary maps prepared by their own national Survey Agen
cies.
I invite the three nations to consider the ideal solution. Both China and In
dia could return the whole of ancient Bhutanese land to Bhutan. And particip
ate with Bhutan to patrol the respective border regions. That way the land C
hina returns to Bhutan cannot be used by India and the land India returns to
Bhutan cannot be used by China. A real politics of status quo put in actual
real life practise could provide for peace of mind of all three neighbours.
I urge Bhutan to finalize the Sino Bhutan international boundary. The issue
has been straggling over three reigns of Wangchuck dynasty since 1970. Also
as successive leaderships of Bhutan have reiterated, the friendship with Ind
ia must remain the corner stone foreign policy of Bhutan. However, China has
the vast potentiality to also assist Bhutan to economic prosperity and econ
omic development must be the central goal of a least developing nation like
Bhutan. Right now Bhutan is the only SAARC Country and maybe the only UN Mem
ber which does not pursue an internationally respectable status relationship
with its immediate northern neighbour China.
India under Shri Modi leadership has gone all out to woo Chinese investment
in India. Prime Minister Modi of India accorded a huge welcome to the Presid
ent of China even whilst Chinese and Indian troops stood at close hostile en
counter positions on the line of disputed Himalayan border. This is one less
on that Bhutanese leadership could put in practise in Bhutan’s relation wit
h China. After all , is not the new Indo Bhutan Big Brother Theme : Bharat f
or Bhutan and Bhutan copycat Bharat? |
|
