Although there have been many negotiations on border disputes, there is still an unresolved issue of territorial sovereignty between China and India. While an agreement to maintain the current situation or to prevent border conflicts seems possible, the countries have not been able to reach a compromise.
In this context, the Ankara Center for Crisis and Political Studies (ANKASAM) presents the views of senior lecturer Khaldoun Dia Eddine from the University of Zurich to assess the impact of China-India rivalry and border disputes on the two countries and the global arena.
1.What lasting solutions are possible in the context of the dispute between India and China over the distance of the Line of Actual Control?
Technically, any lasting solution will demand concessions from both parts. How much are the parties ready for such concessions? To understand that it is essential to understand the motivations (and the history of the Line of Actual Control, which is out of the scope and you covered that certainly in your study).
Several elements can be taken into consideration:
A) History: in the old times this region was remote with difficult access and poor. No one was ready to invest to get or control it. The interest came after the British trial to divide the region and stabilize it, in order to protect its colonial power, hence line like McMahon, Durant and so on. Through this the British kept the Russian and the Chinese away from their zones of interests in Iran, Afghanistan, India and Burma. Today’s states inherited a situation which was dominated by the super-power of that time: the British empire. This situation changed, three big powers are struggling in the region to preserve/ get interests, they are India, China and Russia (despite Russia is not involved in the LAC).
B) Culture: The Chinese are patient, they use time (in addition to their resources) to advance their capacities -as a compressor- and reach their objectives. The also don’t like to lose face, this put limits to any concession they may make later. Because of that, Chinese don’t accept the heritage of the British empire, they consider that they were humiliated by the British during the opium wars in the 19th century. The Indians are traders, they will never give what they have in their hand unless they get a good compensation for it. The impact of the existence of the Dalay Lama in India with a leg -at least culturally and spiritually- is an important factor. The support given by the Indian government and the West to the Dalay Lama is exacerbating the Chinese positions.
C) Geopolitics: The region in South Asia as well as the Indian ocean is a platform of a growing tension. This means that the balance of power is very important for all players. These players are not only the local ones, but international players are also present in the region (USA, Europe, Australia, China, etc.). The complexity of the international relationship makes that this problem can’t be solved by both belligerents without intervention of foreign players.
D) Resources: The Himalaya region is the water reservoir of Asia, all countries on both sides need the water resources, especially because of the climate change. If the analyses done around Afghanistan are right (estimated to be US$3 trl worth) then, it can be expected that the region of the border can have also such resources.
A military war between the two neighbors is in the next future quite impossible for many reasons. But this wouldn’t exclude other forms of wars: economic war, intelligence war, commercial war, cyber warfare, proxy wars in other places around the world, especially around the international trade routes (example the competition between OBOR and IMEC) also the trial to control the maritime zone (South China See from one side and Andaman and other islands from the Indian side).
The only serious way to resolve the conflict would be through negotiations. But for that several conditions should be existing:
- Political will to go through negotiation and concessions.
- International environment which is not pushing for alliances and coalitions.
2. Could you summarise the approach of major powers to this issue? How do Russia, the US and European countries view this issue?
Every superpower today is trying to gain new positions and strengthen the old ones. The best example for that is the war in Ukraine and the push to create new fronts (global south) and extend/ create coalitions (expansion of NATO, strengthening N. Korea-Russia strategic alliance, AUKUS). Some of the tensions in the region indicates how the relationships are vulnerable (China-Philippines, China-Myanmar coalition, China-Vietnam, China support to Sri Lanka, France selling submarines to Pakistan, China-Iran-N. Korea collaboration, etc.).
The three weak elements in this constellation are Europe because of the lack of political will and resources, the Arab world for the lack of leadership, Africa because of the exploitation and lack of unity. This leads our analysis to say that any solution may come on the cost of the weak elements or one of them in one form or other (economic hegemony, control of resources, etc.).
Among the European countries France is playing an important role, especially through the development of its relation (strategic, nuclear and military) with India without losing the contact with China. The trilateral discussion France-India-Australia is also an indicator for the French presence and influence, this was also translated in 2021 with the French participation to the naval exercises of the Quad (USA, India, Japan, Australia). One motivation for that is certainly the presence of France in the Indian ocean.
3. If the two countries cannot reach a definite agreement, can the tensions trigger an active war in the coming years?
War is never to be excluded. Both countries have means to conduct wars with some advantages for China in terms of technology (including military tech, like submarines) and financial resources, India has demographic advantages. But both countries have lack in the strategic depth, this may limit their will to conduct large scale war. Local actions are not to be excluded like those of 2020, but they will be just reasons to move diplomacy or send messages to the other party.
Another option is the status quo, no war and no peace… next generation will deal with that. This option is a very tangible one, we see it in many places around the world (BiH, Cyprus, Kosova, Palestine, Myanmar, East Kongo, etc.).
4. Is there a possibility that India and China will transfer these border tensions to the seas? What can you say about the recent rivalry between the two countries on the waters?
As mentioned early, the control of the Indian ocean is an important factor. Despite that China is geographically not really present on the border of this ocean but it is present through the control of the easter entry to the ocean (South China Sea), the alliance with Iran and Pakistan (investment in the CPEC corridor Kashgar-Gwadar) and the presence of the Chinese military base in Djibouti to protect the Chinese investments in Africa (Ethiopia, Kenya, etc.).
The rivalry would be for now more on the trade level (competition between OBOR and IMEE), but both sides are escalating the preparation of their marines through building new vessels and submarines (or acquiring them) as well as reinforcing the aircrafts (India bought the French airplanes Rafale) and the common naval exercises with other countries.
