news details |
|
|
| No comparison between J&K and Tibet | | | RUSTAM
JAMMU: Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao will visit New Delhi on December 15 - 17 and Indian Prime Minister Mamohan Singh would discuss with him a host of issues, including the presence of China in Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir, and , in India, Beijing would show "sensitivity" on the core issues that impinged on the Indian sovereignty and territorial integrity. In other words, his visit to New Delhi would open a new chapter of relations between the two countries. But nothing of this sort happened. Imperialist and Pakistan-friendly as it is, Beijing did not address the Indian concerns in this regard. The Chinese Premier did not say that he would review his stand on Jammu and Kashmir.
In fact, even as the two countries had been discussing the boundary issue since decades, the state-owned Xinhua and 'Global Times', an English language newspaper published by the 'People's Daily', the official mouthpiece of the ruling Chinese Communist Party, had described the Sino-Indian border as nearly 2,000 km long. Xinhua and Global Times had said: Beijing "only accepts 2,000 kilo meters as the border between the two countries (India and China), and not 3,500." The reports about the length of the border between the two countries were carried in the Chinese official media ahead of Prime Minister Wen Jiabao's December 15-17 visit to India.
The response of the Indian Foreign Secretary was: "The missing 1,500 is, in fact, right along Aksai Chin" and "the government has been aware of it for some time…First of all let me (Nirupama Rao) say that this is not a position that we came across yesterday or day before yesterday. We have been aware of it for some time. Obviously, there are difference of perception, there are divergences between China and India on the length of the border…It is really up to the Chinese to clarify that issue." There is no need to explain the meaning of the stand of the Indian Foreign Office, as everything is self-explanatory. Suffice it to say that ours' is a weak-kneed foreign policy, or no foreign policy at all.
However, the most depressing aspect of the whole situation is the stand of the Indian Foreign Minister on Tibet and Jammu and Kashmir. He and the Indian Foreign Secretary have been repeatedly expressing hope that Beijing would recognize Jammu and Kashmir as one of New Delhi's core issues just like Tibet is to China. The equation between the two is uncalled for. It harms Tibet and it weakens the Indian case in Jammu and Kashmir as well. Tibet was an independent country the expansionist China forcibly annexed it in the 50s. As for Jammu and Kashmir, it is an integral part of India. It became part of India strictly in accordance with what was laid down by the Indian Independence Act, 1947 - Act passed by the British Parliament. The moment one equates Jammu and Kashmir with Tibet, one only gives legitimacy to the Chinese aggression in Tibet and strengthens the hands of Pakistan which considers the state as a "disputed territory."
The fact of the matter is that neither the Prime Minister's Office nor the Indian Foreign Office are clear about the status of Jammu and Kashmir and it is this approach of theirs' that is creating more and more problems for the country in Jammu and Kashmir.
It is, however, true that the Indian Prime Minister did not oblige his Chinese counterpart by not saying that New Delhi recognized Tibet Autonomous Region as part of the Chinese territories. Obviously, he deliberately overlooked the fact that in the past New Delhi had on several occasions ensured that there were no Tibetan protests in India against the "One China principle." Reports from New Delhi suggested that the Prime Minister left out what is being called the "routine Indian comfort line to China that it recognizes Tibet as part of Chinese territory" to tell his Chinese counterpart that his action was in response to Wen Jiabao's unwillingness to recognize J&K as part of Indian territory or his unwillingness to pursue One India principle." In other words, the Indian Prime Minister is not really committed to the line he adopted at the time of framing summit-level joint statement on December 16.
Such a foreign policy would not work. China believes in territorial expansion. It is also committed to defeat the idea of India becoming a great power in Asia. In fact, it considers India as its number one rival in this part of the globe and even beyond. That's the reason Beijing has been systematically encircling India. It's no more a secret that it has established its strong foothold in Nepal, Myanmar, Sri Lanka and Bhutan. It has been hobnobbing with the equally aggressive and expansionist and blackmailer Islamabad in order to keep the pot boiling in India. It has established its stranglehold over Gilgit-Baltistan region with the full backing of Islamabad. Besides, it's also too well-known that Beijing is playing mischief in Himachal Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh and Ladakh region. In fact, it has intensified its activities in the whole of the Himalayas, which are very crucial for the safety and security of India.
New Delhi has to take into consideration these factors and adopt an aggressive policy towards China. Similarly, it has to abandon its Policy towards Pakistan and Kashmir and adopt a hard approach. It has to tell Islamabad and Kashmiri separatists that New Delhi will not compromise its position on the state and that it would, instead, reintegrate PoK and Gilgit-Baltistan into India. (Concluded) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
