LyrArc Article Gist
India and the race in Himalayas road buildup on both sides with China and India responding to each other's efforts on ground that is 11,000 to 14,000 feet high. In the latest buildup India in 2026-2028 is building the Zojila Tunnel in Ladakh to cut travel to 20 minutes across mountainous terrain for supplies to frontier outposts in some of the most forbidding terrain on earth. Much of this region of Ladakh and Kashmir is tens of thousands of miles from Shanghai and Beijing, Tibet is far far from China proper, yet the experience of the Sino-Japanese war in the 1930's and the attempted colonization of China by Japan is alive in the minds of the PRC's leaders, see Tibet as a buffer region. Who see India not as as the land of Gandhi and the Buddha Land that has remained that way since the year 1000, see instead a legacy regime of the British Empire of the 1800's that attempted partial colonization of China.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Guardian provides this first account of what happened in the Galwan Valley border between India and China at the Line of Actual Control. It is described as the worst fighting in 60 years. On the high steep ridge lines above the rapidly moving Galwan River a patrol of Indian soldiers encountered Chinese troops in a steep section of a high mountainous region. They believed the PLA Chinese Army had withdrawn from the ridge in line with a June 6 disengagement agreement. The Indian government says that what happened afterwards was pre-meditated ambush by the PLA forces. In the fighting that ensued the Indian commanding officer was pushed from the narrow ridge falling to the gorge below. Reinforcements from the Indian side were called from a post 2 miles away and about 600 men were fighting in near total darkness in high mountain ridge with stones iron rods for upto 6 hours. Following a decades long tradition to avoid escalation of hostilities because of nuclear weapons of both countries the two sides have not used other weapons. Most deaths on both sides were from soldiers falling or being knocked from mountain ridges. The main problem in the conflict is the Line of Actual Control exists but since China's takeover of Tibet in 1950 there is no agreement that has set the official border. The British Simla agreement in 1912 set the border with Tibet in an agreement between Tibet and the British Empire in India, when Tibet was an independent country. China claims that historically going back to Ming and Qing dynasty Tibet was part of its region. For most of its history Tibet was an autonomous region with closer contacts with India because it is close to Nepal and Nepal is very near the Indian Bihar state border.  A new rail link from Raxaul, Bihar in India to Kathmandu is only 137 kilometres, and from Kathmandu to the Tibet border is only 205 kilometres. Fast rail or road links would put Tibet within a few hours by rail or road to Tibet from India. For the entire period the US exists as a nation about 250 years and from the first landing of the colonists on American shores about 1607 Tibet was a mountainous region that was so remote that few people even knew about the country's existence. Beijing and Shanghai are four thousand kilometres away, India much closer to Tibet through Kathmandu, Nepal and India sharing a common culture, and no one thought much about the mountainous borders at 15000- 20,000 feet in the western Himalayas, till China's takeover of Tibet in 1950. India had no clear idea what this meant in 1950- no clear border except for what was agreed between the Tibetan independent government  and the British in 1912 which was set under the British Empire- resulting in a fluid border. And China had no clear idea that this would put in a place it would not want to be thousands of miles from the Yangtse valley region home to most of China's population, in a remote mountain region at heights of 15,000 -20,000 feet, with little to gain. Throughout history since 1000 and earlier Tibet remained a region that acted as a buffer between China's western provinces and India, the high mountains at 15,000- 20,000 feet making it inaccessible. Which is why the Ganges plains and the Yangtse river valley plains contact was made more through the oceans than by land, and the areas developing distinctly different language and cultures. All this changed after 1954 when the Qinghai Tibet highway was built, the closest city on the Chinese side is Xining. Xining to Tibet is a distance of about 2000 kilometres at an average height of 4500 metres or about 14,000 feet.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
BBC looks at the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960 that allocates waters of 6 rivers. Waters of three rivers in the east going to India, and 80% of waters of three western rivers including the Indus river going to Pakistan. Both countries are required to share waters data to manage agriculture. India is upstream for these rivers.  In the same way China is upstream of the river Brahmaputra in India and is building dams in Tibet to control flow of water downstream to India. There is no treaty for the Brahmaputra between India and China as China has occupied Tibet since 1950's and acquired Aksai Chin in the Kashmir region from Pakistan. Before 1950 for ten centuries Tibet region was a distant land mostly unreachable from China and China was never in control of Tibet. Kashmir region for 15 out of 18 centuries since 100 BC was a land of Vedic, Buddhist Shiva cultures. For China the occupation of Tibet on the borders of India creates a situation that is not sustainable for long and stretches resources at a time when India is rapidly building the same level of infrastructure on its side of the border. Chinese people in the provinces bordering Tibet have shown little interest in moving to the vastly different high country of Tibet. At some point in history not too distant by 2050, China (and Japan) will revert to its Buddhist religion and culture and with respect for Buddhist culture see Sarnath, Kushinagar, and Bodh Gaya more as sacred pilgrimage places in India, a common heritage with India to be treasured and revered. Something the Europeans and Americans cannot comprehend, the depth and breath of Vedic Buddhist and Shiv culture in Asia. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the Washington Post uses Frequently Asked Questions to give readers an understanding of the India China border conflict. The roots of the conflict lie in  China's claim to Tibet based on Chinese troops going to aid Tibet in 1792. This based on the Qing dynasty sending troops to aid Tibet after a Nepalese invasion of Tibet. Tibet and Nepal are neighboring countries in the Himalayan mountains,  Nepal has a border with Indian state of Bihar, and Tibet is north and northeast of Nepal, all in close proximity of several hundred kilometres from India but four thousand kilometres from Beijing near Korea and Japan. The Sino Nepalese war, called the Gurkha war in Chinese, was the result of a dispute between Nepal and Tibet over debased silver coinage supplied by Nepal to Tibet and Tibet's demand for compensation, as well as a dispute about salt supplied by Tibet to Nepal. Chinese forces were repelled by  the Nepalese Gorkhas, and eventually the conflict was settled with a peace treaty between Nepal and Tibet with Chinese mediation for the Tibetan side. When the British East India company intervened in the region in 1815 China was not present, and when Nepal and Tibet had another war in 1855 China was not present.  For the first half of the twentieth century Tibet printed its own stamps and was an independent country negotiating treaties with Britain. China's brief intervention in 1792 is the fact cited by China for its claim to Tibet. Crossing the high mountains to get to Tibet from China's western frontier was for most of history and during this 1792 intervention, a journey that took 3 or 4 months with yaks and mules. Because of the sheer logistics China was present only in a symbolic way in Tibet or Nepal, both regions far more autonomous and remote from China than say a Finland near Russia. It takes 5 hours to go from Helsinki to St Petersburg in Russia. This is about the distance between the border with Nepal in Bihar, India, to Tibetan border with Nepal. By contrast it takes four thousand kilometres journey from Beijing to Tibet and over steep mountain ranges and rivers which would took months of journey with mules and yaks all the way into the twentieth century.  Finland was part of Sweden till 1809 when it became part of Russian Empire, till 1917 when it became an independent country. The Soviet Union invaded Finland one more time before World War II and was repelled, but this is attributed to Russian fears that Finland could be used as a base for an invasion of Russia. Tibet was a buffer between the British Empire and China. Chinese Nationalists party and Communist party thinking may have changed after Japan's invasion of China in the thirties, making extending China's western frontiers to the borders of India as part of the new nationalist idea.  How else can one see Beijing in East Asia throughout its history suddenly at the border with India after its takeover of Tibet in 1950. The period in 1950 when India was just coming out of the partition and tackling millions of refugees on the border with newly created Pakistan.      ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Protests in India after fighting between Indian and Chinese troops in the Galwan Valley, Himalayan region of Ladakh bordering Aksai Chin in Tibet.

LyrArc Article Gist
The issues related to India's borders all hinge on Tibet says the Council on Foreign Relations. Sardar Patel and Nehru had differences of their own on whether the McMahon Line set by the British in a treaty with Tibet as an independent country was the border with Tibet or the border with China.  Between 1913 and 1950 Tibet was an independent country, with an Indian High commissioner in Lhasa between 1947 and 1950. After the Cold War set in and China and the Soviet Union fought to defend the rights of colonial peoples the U.S. and Britain did not recognize Tibet as a part of China. Nehru simply remained with the British status quo of the McMahon line as the Indian border with Tibet, without any clear acceptance  of the invasion of Tibet in 1950 by China, yet accepting the new status quo after the invasion, differing from Sardar Patel on the issue. This is why no clear picture emerges from looking at the official positions of the two countries, and a better understanding can be gained by looking at the border issue from the Council of Foreign Relations in the U.S.   Essentially the border issue is not beneficial for what it gives back to each of the two countries. China sees itself rejecting the period of its weakness during the Japanese invasion so that it reasserts its position to borders that stretch outside where Chinese people live. India sees itself rejecting the weakness during the British period and the early post British period during which India was occupied with the issues relating to partition of British India and the partition of Kashmir. This is why the Council on Foreign Relations can provide a better understanding from and independent perspective.  Both sides have little to gain. China by being at the Tibetan border puts itself in a position where it has little to gain being on the border with a large rapidly industrializing country with a population of over 1 billion.  At over 4000 metres or 20,000 feet the territory and landscape is not one that humans can adapt too in any way, except for a few military personnel doing their term of duty of 6-12 months from India or China. China is even further away from the border as it is a remote border from Beijing, Shanghai, Canton or Chengdu, thousands of kilometres when it is just 8 hours from Srinagar by highway to Leh, Ladakh, and the Nepalese border very close to the Bihar state in India. The very distance suggests remoteness, with customs traditions in the region very different from that in China, suggesting very little connection between Beijing near Mongolia and Tibet or Ladakh very close to India by road or rail. To get some idea how close the Tibet border is to India consider that Rasuwagadhi Fort border point between Nepal and Tibet is only 127 miles by road from Kathmandu. The distance by rail from the Indian border in Bihar to the Nepalese border is only 34 kilometres with a new upgraded rail connection. Being this close India is likely to upgrade infrastructure throughout the northeast region as it upgrades infrastructure, roads and bridges and rail throughout India at an accelerated pace for economic development.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The India China border clashes in the Tawang area of Arunachal are covered in this discussion by experts in United States Institute of Peace. The Tawang area it says is unique because of connections with the Dalai Lama of Tibet and China has special concerns about this area that go back to its invasion of Tibet in the 1950's soon after the British left India and the civil war in China ended with Mao and Communist China in 1949 taking control with the defeat of the Japanese. That chaotic period and Indian unpreparedness along a border that stretches for as long as the US border with Mexico. The lack of Indian infrastructure and roads and military modernization from that period to the last decade is now being corrected on the Indian side in an accelerated effort. Global trade and the economic needs of China in relation to the US, and India's efforts to focus on modernization, common challenges of climate change and pandemics, are leading to a new dimension that is being recognized by all sides. This limits the extent of the clashes and the swift return to normalcy of sorts. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Either China or India was going to at some point develop the Brahmaputra river known as Tsangpo in Tibet where it starts for hydroenergy. It turns out that the modernization of China preceding India's by 20 years and the occupation of Tibet in 1950 has put China in the position of developing this river with a huge dam. The Brahmaputra in Arunachal Pradesh and Assam states of India is the same river that is called Tsangpo in Tibet when since 1000 China had little physical contact with the region greatly remote from Chinese cities such as Beijing and Shanghai. The Brahmaputra in its Tsangpo stretch of the river in Tibetan region originates at lake Mansarovar and Mount Kailas and on a map can be seen as very close to Guwahati, Assam and distant thousands of miles from Beijing. The dam will include 5 hydropower stations, produce 300 billion kilowatt hours and cost $170 billion. Two decades of rapid growth in China supported by the US with technology and capital have given China the capital needed for this type of scale of investment in renewable hydro energy. It will produce as much energy as the UK used in 2024. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
As Foreign Minister in the Moraji Desai government he met Premier Deng and restored ties with China in 1979, leading to yearly meetings that continue to this day for keeping peace- following the invasion of Tibet by China in the 1950's and the border war with India in 1962. That border in Ladakh and Arunachal is again the place of border disputes and casualties at the LAC in 2021-2022. China completes its first phase of modernization by this time, India embarks on its first phase of modernization and seeks calm on the border in alliance with the US to concentrate on development efforts. The British period in India brings with it borders set from that time. The invasion by the Japanese of China leads to Communist control following a civil war and a sense in China that it needs borders that extend to Tibet to be secure. This generates the Indian Chinese border disputes that extend from Ladakh to Arunachal in the high mountain altitudes of the Himalayas. 

LyrArc Article Gist
Indian foreign minister Jaishankar tells a conference in Begaluru that what happens outside India affects each and every Indian. Inflation with prices of fertilizer, foodgrains and oil are affected by the war in Ukraine, coronavirus started in Wuhan, China, the incursions since 2020 in the Himalayas were started at our borders by China and began with its invasion of Tibet, what is happening on the border in Kashmir with crossborder terrorism happens with China's support of Pakistan.  Gaining access to pools of US and European capital and technology will involve action taken by foreign investors from outside India's borders in lands far away. This will affect the infrastructure and the speed and scale of India's industrialization and modernization, and will affect every Indian. It will also help India compete with other industrialized countries including China, and emerge as a leader of the Free World along with US and European Union. The world is where everything takes place and India's place is in the Free World. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Security is at the heart of India's foreign policy. S. Jaishankar points this out at Thiruvanathapuram. He says this was true of the effort at Balakot and even in the midst of Covid at the Line of Actual Control with China when India sent up enormous numbers of troops to defend the border. This is also behind the stand with China that security and LAC comes first in all relations with China. Trade and exchanges all come in the context of LAC, settle the LAC issues first then we can proceed with better bilateral relations, this is what India is telling China.  There are good reasons for this. India has a large border in the most formidable terrain of the Himalayas which is also close to the plains of India in the LAC with China. Any difficulties at the border would weaken India's secuerity and weaken development efforts in the same way that Japan sought to weaken Chinese development through invasion in the 1930's. Tibet looms out of the past. When China invaded Tibet Nehru's couple of pages in Discovery of India on China show that he had no idea of the China that had emerged with Mao and the CCP in its historical struggle against Japanese nationalists and imperialists. He had an idea of China that came from the Buddhist period and India's links from the past. The ruthless Japanese invasion that China confronted on its soil, and British colonial incursions before that, had already transformed the China of the past, which now under Mao in 1948 may have sought more defensible borders by extending them to Tibet as a buffer state. Historically the British had never tolerated Russian or other European or Japanese interference in the border states such as Tibet. There was also the question of capacity. By the time of the invasion of Tibet in the early 1950's China had already fought the Korean War with the US. India's army and defense forces were just coming out of partition and ill equipped for the task of defending the borders in Tibet region. Current governments in a more normal setting cannot change this part of history, yet can take full recognition of the facts that this has created. A strong defense has to be created for defending a border that extends for thousand of miles now that China has unlawfully occupied Tibet. On it also depends a strong and vigorous development effort that helps build the kind of modern defenses as the economy grows and absorbs new technologies rapidly. Both defense and development go together, one cannot have defense without rapid modernization and development, and one cannot have rapid modernization and development without defense. A weak defense would lead to distractions in development leading to the lack of rapid modernization and development as the intruding power interferes in insidious ways in the internal and external links of the country. This is the lesson of colonial interference of western powers in Asia. As Brendan Simms shows in his new book, Europe - Struggle for Supremacy 1500 to the Present, it is also the lesson of a different kind of colonialism inside Europe since 1500, where weaker states inside Europe fell behind with interference in turns by the imperial powers of France, UK, Austria-Hungary, Prussia and Russia. Poland, Finland, Czech Republic in the past and even Ukraine today are just some examples of what can happen when one loses sight of this principle. Poland and the Polish Commonwealth in the 19th century, Hungary right down to 1956, and China in the 1910-1930, India in the 18th and 19th century were weakened internally even after recognizing the problem, so that recognition of the problem is not an adequate condition to prevent countries from facing such foreign interference. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
India China Border and rail connection $40 billion project Chengdu to Lhasa 2025. The infrastructure brings China greater access to the western region of China some of it from the occupation of Tibet in the 1950's that now makes up territory the size of 80% of the contiguous US. India is rapidly modernizing it's side of the border with tunnels and bridges.  This situation is new. For most of history from 1000 to 1950's China had only a remote connection with the Tibetan and Indian border regions where nomadic tribes and Tibetans lived. Very few Chinese numbering by the hundreds or a few thousands may have visited the region as even under the British contacts were very limited with Tibet and border regions in the Himalayas. For China it is far from its major population centers in Beijing and Shanghai and Hong Kong, Shenzen. And it provides few advantages in spreading over a vast region that is remote and in high over 15,000 feet in the Tibetan and border regions. It is only the invasion of Korea and China by Japan in the close of the nineteenth and early part of the 20th century that has created the idea of having buffer regions that protect it from foreign powers. And this is what may happen over the next 50 years as the region goes back to what it was before the 1950's, but with modernization, as India does not seek to reach out beyond Himalayan borders into regions closer to China. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Tibet's history with the invasion ordered by British India's Viceroy Lord Curzon in 1904. China's version of the events is of imperialist invasion of Tibet. After the British withdrew from Lhasa, the Chinese Manchu rulers of Qing dynasty sent 2000 Chinese soldiers to occupy Lhasa. This ended in 1913 with the fall of the Qing dynasty. In 1951 Chinese Communists occupied Lhasa a second time. China's former president Hu Jintao spent time in Tibet during the Cultural Revolution. China has movies and books which show the imperialist occupation of Tibet and events of 1904 in that light. The significance of Tibet is also in the context of being a factor in the worsening of relations between India and China leading to the border conflict of 1962 and border tensions since.

LyrArc Article Gist
Peter Hessler was a teacher in Sichuan province of China before living in Tibet and writing this article for The Atlantic.  It gives some insights into both the thinking of Chinese people and Tibetan people and the changes happening around them. Inevitably changes would have come to Tibet from outside or without China's takeover of Tibet in 1950, would have come in some other form, as it has in neighboring Nepal, Afghanistan, says Hessler, without some of the loss of some of the positive aspects of culture and of Buddhism.  Even in India feudal system of zamindars prevailed in villages into the late British period and the early Nehru period but has gradually disappeared over time, so that change has potential over time to happen, and comes inevitably.  Here he shows- the immigrants from Sichuan province, over 120 million people in the province, and part of a floating population of migrant workers in China, looking for jobs or economic opportunity, and some taking up life at the high Himalayan altitudes for 2-3 years or even 8 year terms. The belief Hessler says among Sichuan immigrants that high altitude was bad for the lungs over long periods and shortened life. The lack of women with a disproportionate number of men making the journey to start a new life in Tibet, the hardships, the enterprising nature of Sichuan immigrants in the shops and retail that Tibetans lacked the enterprising skills to do, the difficulties living with two cultures side by side, the lack of any incentive to learn the local language. The feelings of Tibetan people that they are somehow losing their culture and identity. The sense among immigrants that this is not their first choice of place but somehow would have to do till they go back and find someone to marry during brief trips back home to Sichuan. There is something timeless about this essay, as changes unfold, no one unambiguous trend, a more complex situation.  China's sense that the west has violated its sovereignty under the British and foreign powers in the nineteenth century. The feeling that somehow Tibet is part of this sense of China regaining what it had lost to the foreign powers. Without the realization that Tibet has served as a gift of nature, a given mountainous buffer that helped two Asian civilizations prosper in the Ganges and Yangtse river valleys, thousands of miles apart. And both having the similar experience with the British and foreign powers in the eighteenth and nineteenth century, and both recovering modernizing at the same pace.    The sense China has, says Hessler, that it is about China's sovereignty following a Qing dynasty entry into Lhasa in 1792, even though the Qing saw Tibet as a buffer state running its own affairs separating it from the British Empire on the other side of the Himalayas. Very little contact between China and Tibet for centuries simply because using yaks and mules it would take several months from northern China to Tibet crossing mountain ranges at 15,000 feet. The British saw this as a buffer state in the same way as happened also with the Mughals in the 15th to 18th century, and the Empires between the 11th and 15th century in India.  Because opium was shipped from Bengal under British colonial rule causing great poverty in India against the will of the Indian people, the same sense of violation of sovereignty existed in exactly the same way in the perception of foreign powers in India, so that the notion of violation of one's self respect being shared was serving no useful purpose in this context between China and India.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In a video interview the Indian army chief says the tensions at the India China border in the mountainous Himalayan region arise from different perceptions of where the border is, with each side patrolling the area based on its perception of the border. In random situations both sides are patrolling the same area leading to tensions. This has happened before and is likely to happen again. Cross border discussion mechanisms between the two sides have been setup to tackle the situation of patrols.

The Indian border is defined by the McMahon line for India, and set during British times. China has its own perceptions of the border and China was further away from the Indian border till it moved into Tibet in 1950.

LyrArc Article Gist
Bhutan is a small mountain kingdom in north eastern India, bordering Tibet. Historically close ties with Tibet continued after China's takeover of Tibet following the coming to power of China's Communist Party in 1949. This led to a friendship treaty with India in 1949. A narrow piece of terrritory with 34 square kilometres is part of the dispute between China and India. India opposed the move to build Chinese roads in the area leading to a standoff that is now over 50 days. This territory is significant because it connects India's central plains to the northeastern states. Bhutan opposes the Chinese road work but tries to maintain friendly relations with China. The close relationship between India and Bhutan is part of the situation that emerged after China's takeover of Tibet. The Royal Bhutan Army's salaries are paid by India, road construction is done by India, and subsidies for food and kerosene were provided by India. A parliamentary democracy with a monarch was established in Bhutan under king Jigme Wangchuk, and elections were held in 2008, 2013. This has led to more openness towards China, leading to concern in India.  Bhutan is a popular destination for Chinese tourists who pay $250 for a visa. Indians do not need a visa. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This picture essay in The Guardian shows the 700,000 additional people displaced inside Afghanistan in 2021 in addition to the 2.9 million displaced people by 2020. The British stayed out of Afghanistan except for brief forays from concern about Russia entering close to British India. Not much happened till Zahir Shah, the King of Afghanistan was seen as not doing much for a famine that struck the country in 1972. Drought struck much of the country in 1972 leading to the deaths of over 100,000 people from starvation. The King had ruled since 1933. And for a brief period his cousin and brother-in-law Daud Khan had actually run the administration between 1953 to 1963, before being dismissed with a new constitution adopted not allowing the royal family to rule the country without consulting parliament. The poor handling of famine relief led to the fall of the government appointed by King Zahir Shah in 1972. In 1973 Daud Khan violates this constitution and assumes control of the country. British India was in 1972 the India of the Nehru period, with his daughter Indira Gandhi the democratically elected prime minister. India fought a brief war with Pakistan in 1971 that set up the new nation of Bangladesh from territory of East Bengal. India preoccupied with Bangladesh refugees did not do what the British had done to keep outside powers out of Afghanistan and maintain a stable monarchy. Daoud Khan's repression of Communist party leaders led to Communist party military factions in the army taking over the country in 1978. The Afghan military led by officers in the army's Communist factions had little support in the traditional Islamic nature of the countryside for their land reforms. Leading to a rebellion and entry of Soviet troops under a friendship treaty signed in 1978 with Soviets under Leonid Brezhnev. It is this disrupting of the stability of the Afghan monarchy or the entry of Soviets or Americans or any other foreign influence that was carefully prevented in British India by Britain's India policy, which resulted in a period of peace and stability in that region. The events of 1974 with the fall of the monarchy, and the entry of Russia in 1978 broke two of the main rules the British had observed from 1750- a stable monarchy and no outside influence in Afghanistan. A policy the British also followed for Tibet. When China entered Tibet in 1950 Nehru was too preoccupied with the millions of refugees from Pakistan and failed to prepare in the years 1947-50 for following British policy on Tibet by preparing or anticipating the entry of foreign powers. The entry of China into Tibet in October 1950 led to the Sino India border war of 1962, and led to the current situation of India facing a Chinese army all along the border of Arunachal Pradesh, Ladakh, Nepal and all the way in the Himalayas to Kashmir. The result has been billions of dollars spent by the US every week starving domestic priorities, as president Biden observed this week, and a burial place for empires. Ten years for Russia, and twenty for the US with the same result. It has left the whole region poorer and in humanitarian crisis for 50 years, and created crises for Russia, Pakistan, India, and the US. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Times has this editorial on the fighting at the border between Ladakh and Aksai Chin region in the Himalayas between Indian and Chinese troops. It says China has occupied 50 square kilometres inside the Indian LAC and India is building its infrastructure to match China's in the region. It also points out that the border has no standing in international law, from the period of British rule and the Sikh Confederacy of Punjab region in the 1840's no real effort was made to demarcate the border, a dangerous situation that also arises from Tibet ceasing to be a buffer that existed for centuries between Indian side of the Himalayas and China's western provinces. This means infrastructure building is the only way India can maintain the Line of Actual Control.

LyrArc Article Gist
This year 2025 is the 75th year since the invasion of Tibet by Communist China under Mao in 1950, and the 66th year since the uprising in Lhasa in 1959. The new book by Tibet Dalai Lama will be out in March 2025- Voice for the Voiceless: Over Seven Decades of Struggle With China for My Land and My People.  The Dalai Lama calls for preserving Tibet's Buddhist civilization and culture within China. Bringing China's borders to the borders of India was a serious mistake as the mountains of Tibet and Nepal acted as a buffer zone between China and India. The invasion was a result of seeing India as India under a colonial power the British and independent India still run in 1950 under a system modeled on Britain- what Mao fought against since the 1920's.  In 2025 India has emerged as distinctly Indian and China has emerged from the 1950's communist state into a market economy state. The old colonial period systems no longer exist and only a reversion to the old Buddhist periods since the 5th century in terms of borders makes sense. The Tibet invasion after millenium in which Tibet had relations with Nepal, China and India has created other issues in this region. In the centuries before the colonial powers entered Asia in the 15th century, the Portuguese, Dutch and the British, there was contact, commerce and other relations between India, Nepal, Tibet and China. The earliest contacts were with Bodhidharma prince from from India going to China through these Tibetan mountains to convert China to Buddhism in about the 6th century AD. China reverting to its Buddhist culture is a serious possibility because it is so intertwined with a sense of being Chinese and the culture of China. And with this the borders of times past.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Chinese views on the India war of 1962 are shown at the Beijing Military Museum in a display effort "One Hundred Questions on the China-India Border Self-Defense Counterattack."  China's PLA on its 95th anniversary looks at the 33 day war and calls it a "counterattack." It also says China withdrew because its goals were accomplished of getting back the territory it lost since August 1959 to India, that on the Indian side "the decision making was in the hands of civilian officials who did not understand the military at all," and called it "chaotic." It also brings up the international situation that Russia supported both China and India in the conflict and India had the US on its side. It says PLA withdrew because of the difficulty of supplying the military in the Arunachal region at a great distance from China particularly after the famine that resulted from the Great Leap Forward. Today there is a clear chain of command and joint work by the Indian Air force and the Army, infrastructure to support mountain operations being built at rapid speed, and building of modern defense manufacturing capabilities for the airforce and army as shown at the Defense Expo in Gandhinagar, Gujarat, this week.  One of the first aspects of the border that one sees in the region is how close it is to large population cities and towns in India and how remote it is from large population towns and cities in China. In this sense China after the experience with Russian conflict before 1900, later a large Japanese invasion in 1931and 1937 appears to have responded to its period of semi-colonialism with an aggressive policy of extending its frontiers to regions that were throughout history acting as large buffers between India and China- such being the case of Tibet which was occupied in the 1950's leading to the war with India and a border dispute that had never existed before in history. Other aspects today are that in 1962 the PLA had fought the war against the Japanese and the war agains the Americans in Korea all within a 20 year period. In 2022 China has focused for 50 years on modernizing its economy. The supply chain in the Ukraine war showed shortcomings in the Russian army, and the difficulties of supplying forces at great distances. There is also the question of morale when it is about  miles of icy terrain at heights over 10,000 feet, thousands of miles away from major population cities and towns in China- for reasons of Russian and Japanese semicolonialism behaviour not to be found in regions that had never seen large armies in history such as Tibet or Arunachal or the Himalayan border regions. The distances tell much of the story- the distance from Shanghai, Shenzen or Beijing, to Tibet is over 4000 kilometers and the border region with India additional thousands of kilometers over some of the most rugged terrain on earth with only remote mountain communities existing in the most difficult environments.       ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Indian security officials say Chinese troops have moved back several miles at 3 disputed border patrol points in one of the Himalayan areas. Reduction is not substantial but it shows intent of the two armies said the official cited in the WSJ report. China also removed two dozen armored vehicles. India has also withdrawn some of its vehicles and troops from the front lines. This is after the two sides met for de-escalating tensions. In 2017 for 2 months there was a standoff in  a stretch of land near Bhutan. This one is near Ladakh region in the high Himalayan mountains. The border is 2000 miles long in the mountains of Tibet, Ladakh, Bhutan. This one was near the Pangong Tso lake which is pictured in the WSJ report at a high altitude. India has tried to match Chinese road building and infrastructure efforts in the area in recent years.

LyrArc Article Gist
Anton Harder in this Wilson Center publication of research uses correspondence between Jawaharlal Nehru and his sister Vijaylakshmi Pandit ambassador to the US in 1950, to show that the US made an offer for India to take a permanent seat at the UN Security Council. India had supported two resolutions on June 25, and June 27, first condemning the invasion by North Korea and second the organizing of a UN force of 29 countries to push back the North Korean invasion. Even though the US is not seen as actively engaging with India during that period and seeing through British eyes the colonial policies of encouraging  different powers in South Asia, that may not be true.  Who was India's foreign minister in 1950? Jawaharlal Nehru was both prime minister and foreign minister till 1964, which means there was less discussion of foreign policy than happens today during the Ukraine invasion with Jaishankar a career diplomat with 30 years experience, Rajnath Singh, and Mr. Modi, in talks with president Biden recently, and in further discussions Modi had with EU's Von der Leyen and UK's Boris Johnson, Kishida of Japan. Who was India's defense minister in 1950? Baldev Singh, a Sikh independence struggle leader was Minister of Defense for 1947-52 and tackled partition of Punjab and Kashmir issues. The rest of the years to 1957 when India faced the Chinese invasion of Tibet India's defense minister was also for most of the period Mr. Nehru, except Ayynagar in 1953, and Kailash Katju in 1955 and 1956. The controversial V.K. Krishna Menon was Defense Minister from 1957 to 1962, when Indian defenses were further neglected leading to the Chinese invasion of India in 1962, and his replacement by Yashwantrao Chavan. The purpose of this is to look back at what happened in earlier periods to understand where India stands today- and what choices it makes today. Clearly the US was looking for allies then and now. Nehru saw things from his own reading of history seeing China and India as both suffering from western invasion, not realizing that China's experience under Mao was different- that of Japanese invasion and bombing of China's major cities not just colonization of Hong Kong and other ports for trade under British trade based policies in 1850-1900. Thus a Communist Chinese version of China's defense involved taking over border regions such as Tibet putting China in direct and open opposition to India. Nehru never really grasped what was happening in Tibet and the war China fought against the Nationalists. American general Stilwell loved China deeply and had an understanding of its people as shown in Tuchman's account in her book Stilwell and the American Experience in China 1911-1945. Stilwell during that war had a better understanding of China, the strengths and weaknesses of Mao's China and of the Nationalists under Chiang, than Nehru. Some of these errors post 1950's and a concentration of foreign, defense and embassy positions in the person of Mr. Nehru and of Nehru family member such as Mrs. Pandit led to the Indian failure to act on Tibet and see it as see it for what it was -facing a Communist Mao led China that had fought the Japanese invasion as different from Bodhidharma's China of the history books. Bodhidharma's China will outlast Mao's China, yet it is Mao's China that India faces today. This also tells us that India has to think in new ways- as Lincoln said during a period when America was also making its own progress as an industrial nation in the 1860's. "The dogmas of the quiet past are not adequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise to the occasion. As our case is new, we must think anew, we must act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and we shall save our country." India's values are values of democracy heightened not just by Mohandas Gandhi's ideas with Hind Swaraj written in 1910 just as powerful in 2022, but also by the heights of Ladakh where elections are held in remote regions of the Himalayas. India's values are values that are also shared in the best that America has in its values and culture and in the defense of freedom.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
India's Foreign Minister told a conference that China's forward deployments at Galwan in violation of 1993 and 1996 agreements was an attempt to change the Line of Actual Control. China after years of peaceful development under previous administrations, during which China had gained from the trade relationship with the US and foreign investment from the US business community, sought  to put India at a disadvantage using its larger economy and technological assets obtained through American business assistance. This was done by making forward deployments right at the Indian border to change the Line of Actual Control in progressive steps. Jaishankar made it very clear. "It is hard work, very patient work, but we are very clear on one point, which is we will not allow any unilateral attempt by China to change the status quo or alter the LAC. I do not care how long it takes, how many rounds we do, how hard we have to negotiate- this is something we are very clear of." Going back to the period of independence with Nehru in 1947- China's occupation of Tibet was an occupation of a peaceful country that led to the situation that India faces today of a border stretching from east to west on the Himalayas that faces China. Faced with the partition and refugees from that partition India under Nehru was not in a position to respond effectively to that occupation. Does China gain anything from being at that border through the occupation of Tibet is a serious question? Why? Because it faces a Vedanta and Buddha driven culture and people with population of 1.8 billion stretching to the Indonesian islands that were and still are the fundamental source of  China's own Buddhist culture and tradition.  US business has allied with one country after another Japan, China and now India. The US has faced wars with Japan, and sometimes in a failed attempt to understand the aspirations of  Southern Asia allied with British ideas of the region which were based on the policies of British Empire to divide the region on religious and language, caste based barriers. US business also lacked a true perception of the importance of working class and families in the US as it sent factories and surrendered its own manufacturing to China. The world is now changing following the pandemic and new supply chains and manufacturing policies of the US are being structured. It is in this context where India's pace of economic growth and technological advancement will change its capabilities and its capacity to meet the aspirations of 1.8 billion people in Asia with a common tradition and culture. It is in this context that one can ask the question does China have anything to gain from the occupation of Tibet and being on the border with a country and cultural tradition of 1.8 billion people stretching across South and South east Asia?  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
What will China do for a 2200 mile or 3500 kms border from Ladakh to Arunachal Pradesh in the east with India? That is the question. This is not the British Empire, it is a modern nation like China. India is in the same rapid movement forward that China experienced in 2000-2020 period and Japan in the 1900-1930 and again in 1950-1970. Much of the Tibetan and Himalayan region is relatively even today uninhabited or sparsely inhabited high country and remote from China for all of China's history, till 1950 and its entry into Tibet the culmination of the struggle with policies of colonial empires of Britain and Japan. It has nothing to say about the world in 2025 or 2050 with two ancient civilizations, part of the fabric of Buddhism in Asia side by side, having accepted the modern world of the European civilization that came with the scientific and industrial revolutions between 1600-2000.