![]() Wednesday, Jun 25, 2003 |
| Front Page | ||||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Front Page
By P. S. Suryanarayana
The Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee, going round the Forbidden City in a battery operated cart in Beijing on Tuesday.
The accord of this new magnitude on the border dispute formed a significant part, but only as a sub-text, of a comprehensive "blueprint" for the "beginning of a new era" as seen by the Chinese side. The two sides agreed to appoint a Special Representative each to "explore, from the political perspective of the overall bilateral relationship, the framework of a boundary settlement". Dai Bingguo and Brajesh Mishra were nominated to undertake this exercise. By releasing the details of a memorandum on border trade and the `Declaration on Principles for Relations and Comprehensive Cooperation', both of which were signed on Monday, India and China began a process of transparency that might gradually help clear the ambiguity about Beijing's bottom line on the Sikkim issue. While China firmly maintained, even in this new context, that the status of Sikkim was not yet a settled issue, both countries turned the spotlight on the "win-win" aspects of their latest diplomatic engagement at the highest echelons in a bid to keep the new process of realism on a definitive course. In separate cameos of public diplomacy on the sidelines of the summit, Beijing interpreted the `declaration' as a firm endorsement of Tibet as a non-alienable part of China, while the Indian interlocutors presented the relevant formulation as only a reaffirmation of New Delhi's "consistent" line on this issue. However, this apparent dissonance did not diminish the lustre of a future-oriented `declaration' that was unveiled as the first of its kind on the bilateral front. With both sides raising visions of a possibly new symphony of friendly sentiments but not any strategic partnership, three main aspects of the latest agreements came into a sharp focus. While the boundary issue was put on a qualitatively different trajectory, the formulations on Tibet in the `declaration' and the political implications of the reference to Sikkim in the memorandum on border trade acquired new overtones. India "recognises that the Tibet Autonomous Region is part of the territory of the People's Republic of China and reiterates that it does not allow Tibetans to engage in anti-China political activities in India". Appreciating this, China "reiterated that it is firmly opposed to any attempt and action aimed at splitting China and bringing about `independence of Tibet' (while) the Indian side recalled that India was among the first countries to recognise that there is (but) one China". India said that its "one China policy remains unaltered". The issue of Dalai Lama's sojourn within India was not specifically addressed by either side in the `declaration'. The separate memorandum specified that "Changgu of Sikkim State" would be a new "venue for border trade market" while China agreed to "designate Renqinggang of the Tibet Autonomous Region as the venue" for the same purpose. The Nathula Pass would be used to promote trade in that sector, it was agreed. From New Delhi's standpoint, the beginning of a process towards China's recognition of Sikkim as an integral part of India could be discerned in the related formulation that both countries were "desirous of opening another pass on the India-China border". The identification of Nathula as the pass with reference to the "India-China border" is seen as a pointer to the future disposition of Beijing itself.
Related Stories:
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | Home |
Copyright © 2003, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|