Sign In / Register
Make This My Home Page | Feedback |RSS
You are here: IE »   Story

Why Tibet matters

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • Sonia Jabbar

    China has never accepted Sikkim and Arunachal as parts of India, even today claiming the latter as its own. But when two countries have concluded an agreement between them, China has no locus standi as a third country. A sovereign state is one that negotiates and sign treaties with other states. Once a state exists it cannot simply be wished away simply because another nation has invaded it.

    That the world does not wish to challenge China’s illegal occupation of Tibet thus rendering it a de facto (not de jure) part of China is another matter. However, it is pertinent to ask why the Government of India is so solicitous of China’s national interests at the expense of our own. If China refuses to recognise the treaties signed by India and Tibet, there is no reason for India to recognise the 17-point 1951 agreement, thrust upon Tibet under Chinese gunpoint. China possesses no other legal documents to prove its claims over Tibet.

    Ads by Google

    We have learned few lessons in foreign policy. India unilaterally surrendered its influence in Tibet in the 1954 trade agreement with China by removing its military personnel from the Tibetan trading towns of Yatung and Gyantse, giving up Indian rest houses, land, and Tibet’s communications including the postal, telegraph and public telephone services operated by the Government of India. The agreement had a validity of eight years, and it is no coincidence that its expiry coincided with the 1962 war. If those who parrot the ‘Tibet is an integral part of China’ line paused to think, they would realise that they are unwittingly conceding China’s claim over 83,743 sq km of Arunachal territory.

    ... contd.

    PreviousNext1234
    Don't agreeBy: Alex | 30-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward Tibet was part of china since Yuan dynasty (13 century) and during Ming dynasty, tibet was administered by the China central government, the religious and military leaders in Tibet all need to be approved by the central gov. and this continued in Qing dynasty. Don't know why the author insist Tibet was independent til 1950, you should check wikipedia at least.
    The author is ignorant in the history of TibetBy: WT | 26-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward People still know Nalanda because of Han-Chinese NOT Tibetans.For a long time, Tibet was not part of China. Only about 300 years ago, China annexed Tibet. In 1793, an edict of Chinese emperor established the selection procedure of Dalai Lama, Panchen Lama and other senior lamas. The selection of 14th Dalai Lama was also approved by Chinese central government.
    Same old Indian mindsetBy: Joe | 23-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward Same old Indian mindset that trying to argue and self-justify for robbing someone else's land and fortune. Pathetic, sad, poor Indians...
    Post a Comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.