India walking diplomatic tightrope on Tibet
Rajeev Sharma
Tribune News Service

New Delhi, March 25
India is engaged in a diplomatic tightrope walk vis a vis China ever since large-scale protests erupted in Tibet on March 10, the 49th anniversary of Tibetan uprising that led to fleeing of the Dalai Lama to India.

Diplomatic observers point to numerous reasons for India’s guarded response that elicited a mild reproach from the Dalai Lama when he said India was “overcautious” with regard to Tibet. These reasons range from political to economic to strategic.

The fact that Sino-India bilateral trade is set to reach the $ 50 billion mark soon is an important demonstrator of the fast normalisation of ties between two giant neighbours that went fought a war in 1962.

But it alone is not enough for India to take a hard position on Tibet. India would not like to indulge in a bit of diplomatic sabre rattling with China at a time when the Indo-US nuclear deal is journeying through a sensitive patch and New Delhi would need Beijing’s support whenever the deal goes before the Nuclear Suppliers Group for an India-specific waiver.

This partly explains that though India spoke its mind on the Tibet issue at least thrice in past ten days, a rarity, New Delhi’s response was not full-blooded.

The Indian government took steps to stop the peace marchers and arrested about 100 persons. In response to the troubles in Lhasa the ministry of external affairs said: “We are distressed by reports of the unsettled situation and violence in Lhasa and by the deaths of innocent people. We would hope that all those involved will work to improve the situation and remove the causes of such trouble in Tibet, which is an autonomous region of China, through dialogue and non-violent means.”

But despite expressing its distress, the Indian government made an effort to placate the Chinese authorities by reiterating that Tibet is an autonomous region of China. This has been stated by India on many occasions, including at joint declarations following most high-level visits. Restating it at this time indicates a desire to mollify even as it is forced to take note of the events in Lhasa.

Though New Delhi is hyper sensitive to Beijing’s feelings, the Chinese authorities have no such regard to Indian sensitivities. Prime Minister’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh evoked a statement of protest from a Chinese official on the grounds that Beijing claimed Arunachal as a part of China. In the recent past, Chinese officials have been more assertive in their public statements over territorial claims and disputed territory, especially in Arunachal Pradesh.

On the march of other groups of Tibetan activists, the external affairs ministry issued another statement: “Like our other guests, Tibetan refugees, while they are in India, are expected to refrain from political activities and those activities that affect our relations with other friendly countries.”

The next big thing on the Tibet issue is Beijing’s grand plans to take the Olympic torch up to Mount Everest. Nepal has been pressured to close down the Nepal route to Mount Everest. For the Chinese government the passage of the torch through Tibet and up the mountain is an assertion of its stance that Tibet is a part of China.

China has closed down the Tibet route to Mount Everest for mountaineers this season and persuaded Nepal to close its route between May 1 and 10, when the Olympic torch is to be taken up Mount Everest. Pro-Tibet demonstrations have taken place in Kathmandu after the violence in Lhasa.