Muddy Waters and Information Warfare

Rescuers checking a blocked road in Mainling County not far from the Indian border

An excellent article ('Muddy Siang is sign of danger ahead, wake up call for Indian authorities') on the recent developments on the Yarlung Tsangpo/Siang/ Brahmaputra has been published by the South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP).
It is worth reading.
Two important questions have been raised.
Why China kept quiet if it was ‘only’ a earthquake and why India remained ‘unaware’ when it was not too difficult to ‘know’ the facts with remote satellite imagery.
SANDRP has answered the second question (or at least has questioned the role of the Indian officials).

But why has China kept silent?
According to the report quoted by SANDRP, a huge amount of debris has accumulated and blocked three locations, forming natural dams on the river across a 12-kilometre stretch in Tibet. It was cause by a 6.4 (or 6.9) earthquake in the Great Bend region. It darkened the waters of the Yarlung Tsangpo.
In November, Xinhua quoted the China Earthquake Networks Center (CENC) to report that no casualty had occurred “after a 6.9-magnitude earthquake hit Nyingchi, southwest China's Tibet Autonomous Region at 6:34 a.m. on November 18.”

The agency added that the quake caused "power failures and building damages in a number of villages in [around] the epicenter in Nyingchi City. "
The epicenter was located at 29.75 degrees north latitude and 95.02 degrees east longitude; it struck at a depth of about 10 km and several minor aftershocks were felt.
Xinhua quoted Pasang Tsering, Communist Party chief in Tashigang Village of Lunang Township, saying that he could not stand still in his house when the quake struck: “Six houses in his village had damages from the jolt.”
Incidentally, Lunang (or Lulang) is the newest town in Tibet: “It was built with a total investment of more than 3 billion yuan (436 million U.S. dollars). Here tourists can enjoy splendid natural scenery, various traditions and high-level infrastructure,” wrote Xinhua.

Lunang (or Lulang) new town

According to the Chinese press agency: “Lunang, meaning ‘Dragon King Valley’ in Tibetan, sits near the Sichuan-Tibet Highway. The small town is 3,300 meters above the sea level and is surrounded by Yarlung Tsangpo Grand Canyon, Mount Namjabarwa [Mt Namcha Barwa near the Great Bend] and many other scenic spots. It is known as the most beautiful town in Nyingchi.”
The state of the 'new' Town is unknown.

China finally speaks
Yesterday, Hua Chunying, the Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson, known for her sharp tongue during the Doklam incident, said that China “will maintain communication with India over the transboundary rivers in the wake of lakes and dams being formed on the Yarlung Tsangpo due to earthquakes in Tibet”.
Ms Hua stated: “According to verification by the relevant authorities, I can tell you that this lake is to the east section of the China-India boundary. It is caused by natural factors, it is not man-made."
She added: “I noticed that Indian professional authorities have made an analysis and clarification on this. We hope the Indian media will not make a groundless speculation on this and the Chinese side will, through the existing channels, maintain communication with the Indian side on the cross-border rivers.”
As mentioned earlier on this blog, following the Doklam incident in June, China did not respect its agreements with India to share the data of the Yarlung Tsangpo and the Sutlej.

More details are out
The China Seismological Bureau is said to have launch "a third-degree emergency response mechanism, holding a teleconference to monitor an investigation into the situation and sending experts to the quake-hit region."
Why was India not informed?
The Bureau noted that the highest seismic intensity of the quake affected an area of 500 square meters, which is sparsely populated.
According to the Bureau's findings, the tremors triggered falling rocks, blocking a highway linking Nyingchi's city proper with Tangmai, one of the quake-hit townships. Armed police were called to clear the road.

The Fire Department of the Ministry of Public Security stated that fire fighters from Nyingchi city were working in Tangmai Township: "Another team of rescuers will take helicopter to Gyalha village in the epicenter, after road to the village was blocked by rocks." The Ministry of Transport has also dispatched staff to investigate the safety condition of bridges in the quake-hit area.
The report added: "The Tibet subsidiaries of Chinese telecom providers China Mobile and China Tower said that their networks are operating normally. But the Tibet branch of China Telecom reported the disruption of an optical cable for broadband service in Pome and Zayul counties."
Why nothing was said on the three new lakes affecting the Siang/Brahmaputra?

Bayi, PLA's HQ

A  second earthquake
The Chinese media later reported that a second earthquake took place on December 20, 2017. Pictures showing Bayi town of Nyingchi City appeared in the Chinese press.
Incidentally, Bayi (8-1 or August 1) is the HQ of the PLA in Southern Tibet; August 1 being the date-anniversary of the foundation of the PLA in 1929.
A caption said: “No casualties were reported as of 11 a.m., following two earthquakes in Tibet early Wednesday morning [December 20]. A magnitude 5 earthquake jolted Bayi District of Nyingchi City at 1:40 a.m., according to the China Earthquake Networks Center. At 4:08 a.m., a magnitude 3.2 earthquake hit the same region.”

The Three Warfares
China has kept quiet because post Doklam, Beijing started an information war with India.
This began by an article planted in The South China Morning Post.
On October 29, Jack Ma’s newspaper reported that “Chinese engineers are testing techniques that could be used to build a 1,000km tunnel – the world’s longest – to carry water from Tibet to Xinjiang. …The proposed tunnel, which would drop down from the world’s highest plateau in multiple sections connected by waterfalls, would ‘turn Xinjiang into California’, one geotechnical engineer said.”
The idea was to create hysteria in India, which is not difficult.
Three weeks later, the earthquake triggered a tsunami of alarmist ‘expert’ views in the Indian press.
China decided to remain silent. Ms Hua can now say “We hope the Indian media will not make a groundless speculation on this.” But who triggered the ‘groundless speculations’?
By the end of November, Beijing could have mentioned the earthquake as the source of the black colour of the Siang, but the Chinese leadership preferred to let the Indian media ...and politicians speculate.
Indian needs to be prepared for more Information Warfare.

Bayi ('August 1') town

 

The earthquake was epicentered east of the Namcha Barwa

The Land of Mon

My article The Land of Mon appeared in the yearend magazine of Mail Today.


Here us the link...

Yearend is always the best time to analyse the year that's on the verge of ending. Mail Today does the same with its 24-page special year-ender that maps 2017 through paces like Shopian, Kannur, Darjeeling, Somnath, Ayodhya, Doklam, Agra, Basirhat, Tawang and Sukma. As one of the Mail Today readers told me, it's a collector's copy and should not be missed. I have my own couple of favourites here. I am sure even you will find yours.  

Tawang, the Land of Mon

Located south of the McMahon Line in Arunachal Pradesh, Tawang is one of the most strategic districts in the country. Though before October 1962, no Chinese had ever set foot in the area, Beijing still dreams of controlling it.
Tawang was in the news in 2017, during the Dalai Lama’s visit of the border town in April. The fact that the Tibetan leader had come to Arunachal Pradesh six times between 1983 and 2009, did not deter China from creating again a ruckus; Beijing complained that the Lama’s religious teachings had been engineered by Delhi in an area China calls ‘Southern Tibet’.
Tawang is special in many ways. Buddhists believe in the concept of sacred places or peethas. During the 10th century, the great Indian yogi Tilopa said that peethas are to be found inside your own self, though “outer peethas are mentioned in the scriptures for the benefit of simple fools who wander about”. Tawang is undoubtedly an ‘outer peetha’.
Numerous stories or legends circulate about Monyul or the ‘Hidden and Blessed Land of Mon’ as the region is known; the local population, Monpas are fond of these legends. Many revolve around Tsangyang Gyatso, the Sixth Dalai Lama who was born in Urgyeling, a village south of Tawang.
‘Lama Geno’, in Monpa language could be translated as ‘the Lama knows’. It is what Tsangyang wrote with his finger on a stone near Urgyeling in 1688. A high delegation had just arrived from Lhasa looking for the reincarnation of the Fifth Dalai Lama; the boy ‘knew’ that the Lamas had come to ‘take him back’ to Tibet.

The Simla Convention
History caught up with Tawang in 1913 when two intrepid British ‘explorers’, Captains Bailey and Morshead scouted the Tibetan side of the ‘snow line’ in search of a northern border for India. Their experience and notes were invaluable during the Simla Conference in 1914. In March, Henry McMahon, India’s Foreign Secretary sat with Lonchen Shatra, the Tibetan Prime Minister and managed to fix the Indo-Tibet border in the form of a thick red line on a double-page map — that was the McMahon Line. Thereafter, India had a formal legitimate border in the North-East.

Tibet is invaded
Without warning, in October 1950, Communist China invaded Tibet.
Two months later, a dying Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel got the ball rolling to protect India’s borders. With Sir Girija Shankar Bajpai, the MEA’s Secretary General, he took the initiative to set up a North and North-East Border Defence Committee under Maj Gen Himatsinghji, the then Deputy Defence Minister. The Committee’s first decision was to take over the administration of all Indian territories south of the McMahon Line. The experience of Kashmir, where India reacted too late, was not to be repeated.
Assam Governor Jairamdas Daulatram (NEFA was then part of Assam) ordered a young but highly decorated Naga officer, Maj Bob Khathing, to march to Tawang. On January 17, 1951, Bob, accompanied by 200 troops of Assam Rifles and 600 porters, left the foothills for the historic mission. During the following weeks, the young officer showed his toughness, but also diplomatic skills to pacify the Monpas who were in fact delighted to get, for the first time, a proper administration.
Eight years later, Tawang made the news again when a fleeing Dalai Lama crossed the border at Khenzimane, north of Tawang to take refuge in India.

The Land of Mon
Reaching the Sela Pass, at 13,700 feet above sea level between Tawang and Bomdila (West Kameng District), one feels as if entering another world. first But one is reminded that the area was the theater of the 1962 Sino-Indian conflict. A small mandir is dedicated to the memory of Jaswant Singh, the heroic rifleman who defended the pass and earned a Maha Vir Chakra in November 1962. Looking at the old bunkers, one can vividly imagine the incredible sufferings and bravery of the jawans and officers of the Indian Army, abandoned by an irresponsible leadership (a visit to the 1962 War Memorial in Tawang is also a must).
Two hours later, the first glimpses of the Tawang Gompa (‘monastery’) perched on one of the highest hills overlooking the Tawang Chu Valley (‘chu’ is ‘river’ in Monpa) are breathtaking.
For the past three centuries, life in Monyul has been centered around the Gompa, the fountainhead of the Buddha Dharma for some 30,000 Monpas and other Buddhist ethnic groups (like the Sherdukpens).
The history of the location of the Gompa is most interesting: a monk called Mera Lama, born in Kitpi village near Tawang, spent several years in Tibet before returning to his native place. Before leaving Lhasa, he met the Fifth Dalai Lama who asked him to propagate the Dharma in Monyul and establish a large monastery. The legend says it is Mera Lama's horse who found the location of the new monastery. It became known as Tawang Gompa: in Monpa dialect ‘ta’ means ‘horse’ and ‘wang’ ‘blessings’ (Tawang is ‘the place blessed by the horse’).
One may be called ‘simple fool’ by siddhas, but visiting these ‘outer’ empowered places, is tremendously enjoyable.
Tour operators will of course also take you visit to Sangestar Tso, also known as ‘Madhuri’ Lake. After Rakesh Roshan shot Koyla (starring Madhuri and Shah Rukh Khan), jawans posted in the area began calling it ‘Madhuri’; it used to be a grazing pasture before becoming a lake after the dreadful earthquake of August 1950. Locals say there are as many as 108 lakes in the area, many of them larger and more stunning, many having been blessed by great tantric masters and yogis.
A few kilometers away is the Tagtsang Gompa (the ‘Tiger Lair’ monastery), perched at 13,500 feet. It is one of the several pithas that Guru Padmasambhava, the great Indian tantric master who helped establishing Buddhism in Tibet, Bhutan and the Himalayan belt, visited.
Seeing these exquisite places, one understands why China covets it, but it will never be part of the Middle Kingdom; the Monpas are one of the most patriotic tribes of the country. Further, driving to Tawang, one passes enough Army camps to realize that the Land of Mon is well-guarded.

What China can teach us on research

My article What China can teach us on research appeared in Daily Mail/Mail Today.

Here is the link...

During his report to the 19th CPC National Congress, President Xi Jinping disclosed his plans for the future of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA): "We will make it our mission to see that by 2035, the modernization of our national defense and our forces is basically complete; and that by the mid-21st century our people's armed forces have been fully transformed into world-class forces.”
The Chinese media announced: “As chairman of the Central Military Commission (CMC), Xi is tasked with ensuring the world's largest military take a ‘crucial leap’ in the new era from being simply large to being strong.”
A few weeks earlier, The South China Morning Post wrote about ‘China building giant facial recognition database to identify any citizen’.
The project is to achieve an accuracy rate of 90%, though it faces formidable technological hurdles and there are serious concerns about privacy. The powerful facial recognition system should be able to identify 1.3 billion citizens within three seconds.
Chen Jiansheng, of the department of electrical engineering at Tsinghua University told the Hong Kong newspaper that the government will use this system to track wanted suspects as well as for public administration.
In April 2107, the McKinsey Global Institute published a report, ‘Artificial Intelligence: Implications for China’ which describes the importance of Artificial Intelligence (AI): “the idea that computer systems can perform functions typically associated with the human mind, has gone from futuristic speculation to present-day reality.”
The report further elaborated: “Thanks to advances in data collection and aggregation, algorithms, and processing power, computer scientists have achieved significant breakthroughs in artificial intelligence. Where computer systems once had to be programmed to execute rigidly defined tasks, they can now be given a generalized strategy for learning, enabling them to adapt to new data inputs without being explicitly reprogrammed.”
In the years to come, the PLA plans to benefit from AI to enhance its efficiency ‘to win wars’ and reach the objectives fixed by Xi Jinping.
Elsa Kania from the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) noted in a recent report: “China is no longer in a position of technological inferiority relative to the United States but rather has become a true peer (competitor) that may have the capability to overtake the United States in AI,” she adds: “it could alter future economic and military balances of power.”
The main use of AI is part of the in-depth reforms of China’s defence forces for a wider ‘integration’ of the different services which are now five. At par with the PLA Ground Forces, Navy and Air Force, are the PLA Rocket Force (formerly, the second artillery) and the Strategic Support Force (SSF), a game changer, according to all observers. The use of AI will come under the umbrella of the PLASSF.
The Diplomat noted a few months back: “While the Chinese PLA’s new SSF is a critical force for dominance in the space, cyber, and electromagnetic domains …the SSF’s function of ‘strategic support’, namely information support, will be equally vital to the PLA’s capabilities to fight and win wars.”
Apart from restructuring the commands, Xi Jinping also wants to give a boost to the Research and Development (R&D) to catch up with the United States in terms of new weaponry in the decades to come.
A couple of weeks ago, the Chinese Central Television (CCTV) broadcast a TV documentary about the ten aircraft carriers planned by China. Jane’s Review reported that Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) will “be fitted onto the second of the country’s indigenously built aircraft carriers, commonly referred to as the Type 002,” the system is similar to the EMALS used by the United States.
A lot of money is also poured into the Hypersonic Vehicle Technology Project; available data shows that China has started developing conceptual and experimental hypersonic flight vehicle technologies such as hypersonic cruise vehicles (HCV) capable of maneuvering at Mach 5 speeds (6,150 km/h), flying in near-space altitudes. It could be another game changer.
Cutting-edge research in the field of quantum communication (which will make communications un-hackable) is also undertaken by the Chinese scientists. The Academy of Military Sciences explicitly asserted: “Space and cyberspace increasingly constitute important battlefields. A new type of five-dimensional battle-space of land, sea, air, space, and cyber is currently taking shape, which is wide in scope, hyper-dimensional, and combines the tangible and intangible.”
The list of new fields of research is long.
China is for example working on an unmanned combat aerial vehicle named the ‘Black Sword’, which could one day compete with the best US drones.
New materials such as smart materials and structures, high-temperature superconducting technologies, and highly efficient energy materials technologies.
Beijing has a medium and long-term programme which aims at transforming China into an ‘innovation-oriented society’ by 2020; the plan defines China’s leading-edge technologies.
Beijing has also ‘megaprojects for assimilating and absorbing’ technology; an import substitution action plan in order to create indigenous innovations through ‘co-innovation’ and ‘re-innovation’ of foreign technologies.
In all probability, the Israeli Heron drone which recently fell in Chinese hands in Chumbi Valley in Tibet will soon be ‘assimilated and absorbed’.
Xi Jinping has a Dream, the great rejuvenation of Chinese nation: “It is an unstoppable historical trend that won't be diverted by the will of any individual country or person,” asserts China Military Online.
India has something to learn from the Middle Kingdom in terms of looking into the future. It is however doubtful if the Indian public sector has the dynamism to catch up with China. The time has perhaps come for the Modi Sarkar to start a new scheme, ‘Research in India’ and involve the private sector. AI could be the first field of research.

Tragedy of Kashmir that bleeds us to this day

Maharaja Hari Singh of Kashmir and Sardar Patel

My article Tragedy of Kashmir that bleeds us to this day appeared in the Edit Page of The Pioneer.

Here is the link...

One fateful decision taken by Nehru seventy years ago, much against the advice of Sardar Patel, is still creating ripples in the Indian sub-continent. India continues to suffer for the Kashmir mistake

Seventy years is a long time, but a blunder which took place in the last days of 1947, is still creating ripples in the sub-continent. I am speaking of Kashmir. On October 20, 1947, the Indian State of Jammu & Kashmir was invaded by tribesmen and Pakistani nationals from bases inside the Pakistan territory.
Six days later, Maharaja Hari Singh offered to sign the instrument of accession of his State to the Indian Union. The following day, on October 27, the British Governor-General of India accepted the offer; thereafter, the State became an integral part of India.
In a separate letter to the ruler, Mountbatten expressed a wish that the people of the State should be given the right to decide whether they should remain in India or not. This was to take place at a future date when law and order had been restored and the soil of the State cleared of the invaders.
In the following weeks, the situation continued to worsen; on December 19, in a note on Kashmir, former Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru noted: “there has been a progressive deterioration and the initiative appears to have been with the enemy most of the time.”
Even the pacifist Prime Minister realised the seriousness of the situation: “What is happening in Kashmir State is not merely a frontier raid but a regular war, on a limited scale, with the latest weapons being used on the part of the invaders.” Nehru continued: “This type of operations can continue for months and months and years without bringing any result. The longer they continue the greater harm they cause to India.”
He agreed that only solution for India was a military action which meant hitting at the raiders, their bases and supply lines in Pakistan.
When Lord Mountbatten, the Governor General, realised the possibility of a change in India’s policy, he decided to act quickly. Since the beginning of the crisis in Kashmir, he had wanted to give the United Nations a say in the matter. But for India, the mere fact of appealing to the United Nations meant creating a ‘dispute’ where there was no dispute; the Kashmir maharaja, like more than 500 other rulers, had acceded to the Indian Union. The fact that Pakistan has organised an armed invasion of Kashmir was a separate issue; the accession of Kashmir was indeed legal, Mountbatten had himself accepted it in writing.
But if India was to declare a war on Pakistan, it would have many consequences for Great Britain and Mountbatten’s career. First, the British officers, serving in the armies of the two dominions, would have to resign; the ‘stand down’ order issued by London was clear on this. The British generals were not vital for India, since the indigenisation of the Army had made great strides since August 15; however, it would have serious consequences for the Pakistanis who were totally dependent on the British officers.
Another consequence was that Mountbatten would probably lose his job, it was impossible for a Briton to be the Head of a State at war against another member of the Commonwealth (ie Pakistan).
As Mountbatten started putting pressure on Jawaharlal Nehru to refer the issue to the United Nations, a distressing incident took place in Delhi. Though legally, the issue of Jammu & Kashmir was under the Ministry of States headed by Sardar Patel, Nehru decided to take over the Kashmir file. We shall see the consequences.
On December 23, using the excuse of 150 motor vehicles being sent from East Punjab to Kashmir by the States’ Ministry, the Prime Minister wrote to Patel: “I do not appreciate the principle which presumably the States Ministry has in view in regard to its work. That Ministry, or any other Ministry, is not an imperium in imperio, [a state with the State] jealous of its sovereignty in certain domains and working in isolation from the rest.”
This was totally unfair to Patel.
But Nehru argued that Kashmir was connected with international, military and others issues “which are beyond the competence of the States Ministry as such.”
Patel immediately decided to resign; he told Nehru that the latter’s letter “has caused me considerable pain …In any case, your letter makes it clear to me that I must not or at least cannot continue as a Member of Government and hence I am hereby tendering my resignation.”
Unfortunately, on Gandhi’s intervention, Patel had to withdraw his resignation, but thereafter he had no say on important decisions on Kashmir. This would have tragic consequences.
Once Patel was out of the way, Mountbatten could act; he asked the British High Commissioner in Delhi to inform Attlee of the catastrophic military situation for India and that if Uri and Naushara fell, there would be nothing he could do “to stop the Indian forces from marching in West Pakistan.”
The problem was that Mountbatten, as Chairman of the Defence Committee, was privy to all Delhi’s decisions. He could not tell Attlee, the British Prime Minister, to directly write to Nehru, by referring to plans that Attlee was not supposed to know. Mountbatten, therefore, suggested that Nehru should himself keep Attlee informed of the situation.
Naively, the Indian Prime Minister wrote to Attlee to explain to him that India had no alternative but to attack Pakistan; the last thing His
Majesty’s Government wanted to see was the end of Pakistan as Attlee knew very well that as soon as the war would break out, all British officers would have to leave both dominions.
He replied the same day to Nehru that his Government was very much disturbed by the fact that India believed it had the right to enter Pakistan, even in self-defense. Attlee knew Nehru well enough to play on a very sensitive point: That world opinion would condemn him and India.
Probably also influenced by Edwina Mountbatten, Nehru fell into the trap; he wrote a complaint to the United Nations. But by accepting Mountbatten’s suggestion to unveil India’s plans to Attlee, Nehru committed a major blunder, and Patel could not intervene anymore.
On December 28, 1947, in a letter to Lord Mountbatten, Nehru wrote: “In view of the great importance of the step we are contemplating regarding a reference to the United Nations, we had a special meeting of the Cabinet today to consider it.” A ‘draft reference’ was approved and a copy sent to the British Prime Minister.
The next day, Vallabhbhai Patel was informed “I am sending you separately a copy of a telegram sent yesterday to the Prime Minister, UK, in regard to Kashmir. We held a meeting of the Cabinet yesterday afternoon when we considered this telegram and the draft reference to UNO.”
Patel had been sidelined and the harm was done. Seventy years later, India is still suffering from the blunder then committed.
Such a tragedy!

India needs to be wary of ‘Tibet development’

The Dalai Lama (left) with the Panchen Lama in Beijing (1954).
The Tibetan leader's last visit to China

My article India needs to be wary of ‘Tibet development’ appeared in The Asian Age/Deccan Chronicle.

Here is the link...

As I finished writing this article, the news flashed that "the Dalai Lama could possibly head to China on a private visit, the Sikyong (head) of the elected Central Tibetan Administration, Lobsang Sangay, confirmed today." Sangay told the press: “Don’t read too much into it. At most it’s a private visit and it’s too early to say anything.”
The visit, if it materializes, is bound to be a serious security issue.
[Thankfully, the Dalai Lama's visit to China was later denied by the Central Tibetan Administration in Dharamsala].

Tibet and the Dalai Lama have recently been in the news. Does this mean that the Tibet issue is moving towards a solution? Probably not.
On November 23, the Dalai Lama affirmed in Kolkata: “Tibet does not seek independence from China but wants greater development. …China and Tibet enjoyed a close relationship, though there were occasional ‘fights’.”
While saying that China must respect the Tibetan culture and heritage, he added: “The past is past. We will have to look into the future. …We want to stay with China. We want more development.”
‘Development’ did not come up when the Tibetan spiritual leader met with former US President Barack Obama on December 1; they discussed ‘compassion and altruism’, according to an aide. The Dalai Lama said that the meeting with Obama was ‘very good, I think we are really two old trusted friends’; during their 45-minute encounter, the two leaders only discussed promoting peace in today's world torn by strife and violence.
On his return to Dharamsala, the Tibetan monk announced that he may not travel abroad in the future; his fatigue had increased significantly, he said. He has already nominated two official emissaries, President Lobsang Sangay and former PM Samdhong Rinpoche who should be acting as his official envoys.
A few days later, the Dalai Lama was again in the news, he gave an unusually long (a full page of the newspaper) interview to The Times of India (ToI). Apart from mentioning the Tibetan tradition and its closeness to India’s belief system, and their relevance in today’s world, when asked about his earlier declaration about more development in Tibet, the Tibetan spiritual leader commented: “We also need material development. And many Chinese are showing genuine appreciation of Tibetans' spiritual knowledge. …Eventually in the future, with Buddhism, we could control China. Yes, this is possible!” The Dalai Lama added: “The Chinese government must respect Tibetan culture and the Tibetan language. One time, Chinese narrow-minded officials deliberately tried to eliminate Tibetan language and script — this is impossible to do. Tibetans too have an ancient culture that's difficult to eliminate.”
This time again, no word about returning to his native land and about ‘more development’ for Tibet which could become a serious problem for India.
What would indeed mean more development on the plateau?
For the Tibetans, it would probably translate into more Han Chinese migrating to Tibet in order to build and maintain new roads, airports, railway lines and cities.
For India too, it would have implications as all these new developments have a dual use, i.e. civil and military.
On July 1, 2016, China Military Online reported that a joint meeting on the development of military-civilian integration (known as ‘dual-use’) of airports had been held in Beijing.
On the agenda was the ‘Interim Provisions of Operation Security at Dual-use Airports by the PLA Air Force (PLAAF)’. According to the PLA website, it is based on win-win principles for both the military and civil administration. The new arrangement integrates the development of military-civilian airport resources between the PLAAF and civil aviation; the article further explained: “Its main purpose was to establish a complementary management mechanism with smooth coordination and shared resources to gradually form a support capability that guarantees flight safety at peace times and meets combat needs at wartimes.”
Soon after, Lhasa Gongkar airport became one the two first ‘integrated’ airports in China.
Since then, the National People's Congress passed a new law dealing with national defense transport. The legislation covered the use of infrastructure for defense as well as civilian purposes. Xinhua reported: “The new law regulates the planning, construction, management and use of resources in transportation sectors such as railways, roads, waterways, aviation, pipelines and mail services, for national defense.”
After the recent incident at the trijunction between Sikkim, Tibet and Bhutan, more ‘development’ facilitating the rapid deployment of troops and airborne Special Forces on the plateau, China could be tempted to enter into a conflict with India.
Another example: the Siang becoming black was recently commented on in the Indian press. Though not due to a ‘diversion’ of the Brahmaputra, the silt can, with certitude, be attributed to ‘developments’ in Southern Tibet and possibly to an earthquake which occurred on November in the vicinity.

Earthquake near the Great Bend on November 17

The day the Dalai Lama met Obama, a Chinese website mentioned the road to Metok, the last Tibetan village before the Yarlung Tsangpo enters India in Arunachal Pradesh and becomes the Siang. The Chinese article says that Metok was an ‘isolated island’ due to lack of transportation: “The situation was unchanged until October 31, 2013 when Zhamo Road was completed …[since then] the road mileage has been increasing rapidly.”
Daqiao, Metok’s deputy county chief admitted: “The completion of the road also boosts local tourism, which has generated much more incomes for local people by offering services to a growing number of tourists.”
Wang Dong, Daqiao’s boss added: “We are upgrading the road this year with an investment of 1.2 billion yuan.”
It is a lot of money to ‘upgrade’ an existing road so close to the Indian border; undoubtedly, such ‘development’ will bring more silt to the Brahmaputra …and the PLA closer to India’s border.
In a related issue, former Ambassador Phunchok Stobdan commented in The Wire: “Within this rapidly-unfolding scenario, the Dalai Lama appears to have sent Samdong on a discreet visit to Kunming [in China’s Yunnan province]. Samdong’s visit, starting from mid November, must have been facilitated by no less than You Quan – newly-appointed head of the United Front Work Department that overseas Tibetan affairs. You Quan, who formerly served as party secretary of Fujian, is a close associate of President Xi.”
Though Samdhong’s visit has not been confirmed, it is doubtful that the Tibetans could sign a deal with an everyday more authoritarian regime in Beijing in the present circumstances; it is however worrisome for India. If the Dalai Lama returns to Tibet, will the Tibetans take Beijing’s side on for the disputed borders, particularly in Ladakh or Uttarakhand (in the case of Tawang, the Dalai Lama has made it clear time and again, that it is Indian territory)?
Another strange development is the nomination of a Tibetan General, Thubten Thinley to the recently-held Communist Party’s 19th Congress. General Thinley, besides being a rare specimen of a ‘minorities’ general’, specialized in military recruitment; his job is to recruit Tibetans in the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). For China, it makes sense to enroll more Tibetans in the PLA and post them on the ‘Indian’ borders.
Local Tibetans are tempted by the enrollment, as it brings more decent revenues to the poorer sections of the Tibetan society,.
The Dalai Lama told the ToI: “China needs India, India needs China …There is no other way except to live peacefully and help each other.”
It might be true in theory, but the Doklam incident has taught us that there is a gap between the theory and the present practice.
India should be watchful of Beijing’s next move on the Tibet issue.

The 'Tibetan' Hans

Wang Huning, Politburo Standing Committee member in the Tibetan delegation

In March, China will have a new government or State Council.
Its composition is already more or less known.
The always well-informed South China Morning Post announced the names of most of the State Council’s members.
It will however have to be ratified by the People’s National Congress (NPC) next March.
Some 20 ‘Tibetan delegates’ represent the Tibetan Autonomous Region at the NPC.
Among them are a few Hans.
In the last NPC, the most illustrious member of the Tibet delegation has been Wang Huning, today member of the CCP’s Politburo Standing Committee, Executive Secretary of the Secretariat of the CCP Central Committee and Director of the Central Policy Research Center of the CCP Central Committee.
He will probably be re-nominated (incidentally, President Hu Jintao was also a member of the Tibet delegation).
Another Han member used to be Chang Xiaobing, former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of China Unicom; since then he has been ‘investigated’ and he is today languishing in jail. He will be replaced by another corporate tycoon.
A third one has been in the news this week.
It is Prof Ding Zhongli, Vice President of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, who has just been nominated Chairman of China Democratic League (CDL).
According to his biography, Ding Zhongli is a native of Zhejiang province. Born in 1957, he graduated from Zhejiang University, and received a doctorate from the Institute of Geology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. He is the director of the Institute of Geology and Geophysics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences.
Since 2008, he became vice-president of the Chinese Academy of Sciences.
Ding Zhongli has been researching paleoclimatology and the Chinese loess deposits for over twenty years. He and his co-authors systematically investigated the loess stratigraphy of the Loess Plateau, demonstrated the continuity of the loess-soil sequence by correlating the loess sections of the Plateau, and subdivided the loess deposits into 37 pedostratigraphical units in the past 2.6 Ma. He established an orbitally-tuned time scale for the loess sequence on the basis of the Baoji grain-size record. …By correlating the climate records of the loess with those of the deep-sea sediments, he showed that changes in global ice volume may have been a major factor in driving glacia-interglacial variations of the Asian monsoon system.
Why is Ding member of the Tibet delegation at the NPC?
One reason might be that the Chinese leadership wants to keep a tab on the environment of the plateau (Xi can keep an eye on the political developments through Wang Huning).
Prof Ding has now become Chairman of the China Democratic League (CDL).
What is the CDL?
It is a ‘political’ party founded in March 1941; it is headquartered in Beijing and it has a membership of 230,000. The ideology of the party is ‘Socialism with Chinese characteristics’.
The CDL (or Minmeng) is one of the eight legally recognised political parties in the People's Republic of China.
At the time of its formation (in 1941), it was a coalition of three pro-democracy parties and three pressure groups. Its two main goals were to support China's war effort during the Second Sino-Japanese War and to provide a ‘Third Way’ from the Nationalists and the Communists.
The party tilted towards the CCP during the Chinese Civil War.
According to Wikipedia: “Thereafter, two of its constituent parties, the China National Socialist Party and the Chinese Youth Party, left the League to join the Nationalists in Taiwan. The ‘Third Party’ eventually became the Chinese Peasants' and Workers' Democratic Party in 1947. It left the League, but remained pro-Communist.”
In 1997, it adopted a constitution, which stipulated that its program was "to hold high the banner of patriotism and socialism, implement the basic line for the primary stage of socialism, safeguard stability in the society, strengthen services to national unity and strive for the promotion of socialist modernisation, establishment and improvement of a market economy, enhancement of political restructuring and socialist spiritual civilisation, emancipation and development of productive forces, consolidation and expansion of the united patriotic front and realisation of the grand goals of socialism with Chinese characteristics."
We may have to wait next March to see if Prof Ding is still a member of Tibet delegation to the NPC, but there is no reason why he should not be.
The question remains what is/will be his contribution?
The CDL's program is probably fitting with Beijing’s objectives in Tibet.
A Chinese government website noted that in September 1949 the CDL attended the First Plenary Session of the CPPCC in Beijing. It took part in drawing up the Common Program and preparing for the establishment of the People's Republic of China: “Since New China was founded, the CDL has been sharing weal and woe with the CPC and making important contribution to the state political life, economic construction, culture and education.”
With Wang Huning and Ding Zhongli, Beijing can keep a close check on the political and environmental developments on the plateau.
Whether the Tibetans will benefit the presence of these two Han delegates is another issue.

How a football match exposed China's growing paranoia over Tibet and the Dalai Lama

My article How a football match exposed China's growing paranoia over Tibet and the Dalai Lama appeared in DailyO/Mail Today

Here is the link...

Recently, the Chinese U-20 men’s team walked off a pitch in Germany to protest activists unfurling the Tibetan flags.

Over the years, Beijing has become more and more quick-tempered, not to say paranoid, about Tibet. Recently, the Chinese under-20 men’s football team was in Germany to play a series of friendly matches against local teams as part of a project to improve China’s chances at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. One should remember that President Xi Jinping is a great soccer fan and his "Chinese dream" includes a great national soccer team.
The exchange was organised by the Chinese Football Association (CFA) and its German counterpart (DFB). It would have been an innocuous incident elsewhere, but on November 18, during a match against TSV Schott Mainz, a regional team, some Tibetan activists unfurled Tibetan flags; furious, the Chinese players left the pitch for around 20 minutes in protest.

Reaction
It later turned into a full-fledged diplomatic incident. The German football association said that the Chinese under-20s would not play the three matches scheduled before the end of the year, while the CFA announced: “It has been decided to pause the U20 project and arrangements have been made for the team to return home.”
The German media was rather amused by this knee-jerk reaction. But The People’s Daily was not. “It was inconceivable that the just act of safeguarding China’s national interest was labelled by some German media outlets as an ‘attack on freedom of expression’ and a ‘suppression of democratic rights’,” it wrote. The mouthpiece of the Communist Party questioned: “Where was the friendship in the ‘friendly’ games,” adding: “Who would tolerate turning a sports game into a political assault against national sovereignty.”
The paper went in a long tirade justifying China’s stand on Tibet: “Tibet has been China’s territory since ancient times, and the Tibet issue involves China’s core interests and the feelings of the Chinese people.” It even quoted Pierre de Coubertin, the father of the modern Olympics Games. “O Sport, You are Peace! … Through you, the young of the entire world learn to respect one another, and thus the diversity of national traits becomes a source of generous and peaceful emulation!”
Well, it is doubtful that the French baron would have banned the Tibetans to exist as a nation; he was a great humanist, but that is another story. The point is that China is getting touchier; a historical incident about the Tibetan flag is telling. Phuntso Tashi Takla, the Dalai Lama’s brother-in-law, was in charge of the Tibetan leader’s security when the latter visited China in 1954-55.
Three decades ago, in an interview, Takla told me: “In 1954, the Chinese extended full courtesy and cooperation to the Dalai Lama. On some occasions, Mao Zedong came himself to the Dalai Lama’s guest house in Beijing. During one of the several discussions that the Dalai Lama and Mao Zedong had, they were talking on some subject, when Mao suddenly said: “Don’t you have a flag of your own, if you have one, you can hoist it here”. Takla was surprised to hear Mao speaking thus.

Episode
In his memoirs, the Dalai Lama’s translator Phuntso Wangyal corroborated the story. “One day, Mao unexpectedly came to visit the Dalai Lama at his residence… During their conversation, Mao said, ‘I heard that you have a national flag, do you? They do not want you to carry it, isn't that right?’ Since Mao asked this with no warning that the topic was to be discussed, the Dalai Lama just replied, ‘We have an army flag’. I thought that was a shrewd answer because it didn't say whether Tibet had a national flag. Mao perceived that the Dalai Lama was concerned by his question and immediately told him, ‘That is no problem. You may keep your national flag’. Mao definitely said ‘national’ flag,” recalled Wangyal.
The episode in Germany reminded of another incident during President Jiang Zemin’s visit to Switzerland in 1999. As Jiang arrived near the Swiss national parliament building in Berne, a dozen Tibetan sympathisers standing on the rooftop of a nearby building unrolled banners to which multi-coloured balloons were attached; it said ‘Dialogue with Tibet’ and ‘Free Tibet’.

Questions
The incident made the Chinese President so angry that in his speech to the Swiss parliament he said: “You've lost a good friend.” He asked his hosts through an interpreter: “Do you not have this capacity to run this country?” He continued: “I have visited many countries all over the world and have always been welcomed everywhere.” Later, Jiang declined to shake hands with Swiss President Ruth Dreifuss. It was a great diplomatic embarrassment for his hosts.
These incidents raise serious questions. Was Mao, the ruthless leader, more tolerant than his successors? Why is China today so nervous when it comes to the Dalai Lama or Tibet?
One reason is probably a guilt consciousness; Beijing knows perfectly well that till 1951 Tibet was an independent nation; did not Mao speak of ‘liberating’ and reuniting Tibet with the motherland? The Dalai Lama recently declared in Kolkata that he does not seek independence from China: “The past is past. We will have to look into the future. We are not seeking independence... We want to stay with China. We want more development."
Were Beijing to agree to the Tibetan leader’s proposal, what would happen if some young Tibetans unfurl a flag in Lhasa? It is frightening just to think of it.

Of realising dreams and making them come true

My article Of realising dreams and making them come true appeared in the Edit Page of The Pioneer.

Here is the link...

India must learn from the Middle Kingdom which is already on the path to rejuvenation. It is a pity that while we have the ingredients (brains), political will is lacking

Despite (or perhaps thanks to) its rigid system of governance, at the beginning of 2016, China has undertaken in-depth reforms of its defence forces, aiming at a far wider ‘integration’ and a greater jointness of the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA’s) different branches.
Instead of the three traditional services, China has now five ‘services’; added to the PLA’s Army, Navy and Air Force, are the PLA Rocket Force (formerly, the second artillery) and the Strategic Support Force (SSF), a game changer, according to all observers.
“While the Chinese PLA’s new SSF is a critical force for dominance in the space, cyber, and electromagnetic domains,” The Diplomat noted a few months back, “the SSF’s function of ‘strategic support’, namely information support, will be equally vital to the PLA’s capabilities to fight and win wars.” It is certainly the force to watch.
It, however, is not only about restructuring the commands and the military regions; President Xi Jinping wants also to give a boost to the Research and Development (R&D) domain to catch up with the United States in terms of new weaponry in the decades to come.
Last week, the Chinese Central Television (CCTV) broadcast a TV documentary in which the actual number of aircraft carriers planned by China was given. In a first stage, it will be six. The first two ski-jump takeoff mid-sized models have come out of the dockyards. The next two should be conventionally-powered carriers with catapult take-off capabilities; probably an electromagnetic catapult. Jane’s Review reported that it will “be fitted onto the second of the country’s indigenously built aircraft carriers, commonly referred to as the Type 002.” Jane’s had previously reported that the system was similar to the General Atomics Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) used by the United States.
The last two carriers will be nuclear-powered comparable to the US Nimitz class. In the long-run (by 2050), China will build another four world-class carriers, thus giving the PLA Navy 10 aircraft carriers.
On November 26, CCTV showed the footage of a Dongfeng-41, or DF-41, Beijing’s next-generation intercontinental ballistic missile, which could strike anywhere in the world. It has a range of 7,500 miles and could carry up to 10 nuclear warheads. A Chinese military expert claimed “the missile can hit every corner of the earth” — ie the US. The warhead is set to be inducted in 2018.
A lot of money is also poured into the Hypersonic Vehicle Technology Project; available data shows that China has started developing conceptual and experimental hypersonic flight vehicle technologies such as hypersonic cruise vehicles (HCV) capable of maneuvering at Mach 5 speeds (6,150+ km/h), flying in near-space altitudes. It could be another game changer.
Cutting-edge research, like in the field of quantum communication (which will make communications un-hackable) is also undertaken by the Chinese scientists.
The Academy of Military Sciences explicitly asserted: “Space and cyberspace increasingly constitute important battlefields. A new type of five-dimensional battle-space of land, sea, air, space, and cyber is currently taking shape, which is wide in scope, hyper-dimensional, and combines the tangible and intangible.” The list of new fields of research is long.
Take the long-range unmanned aerial vehicles. In 2015, media reported the development of the Shendiao (Sacred Eagle or Divine Eagle) as the PLA’s newest high-altitude, long-endurance UAV for a variety of missions such as early warning, targeting, Electronic Warfare (EW) and satellite communications. China is also working on an unmanned combat aerial vehicle named the ‘Black Sword’, which could one day compete with the best US drones.
Beijing has a medium and long-term programme which aims at transforming China into an ‘innovation-oriented society’ by 2020; the plan defines China’s leading-edge technologies. Last year, a US report explained: “China has identified certain industries and technology groups with the potential to provide technological breakthroughs, to remove technical obstacles across industries, and to improve international competitiveness.”
There are other fields such as ‘intelligent perception technologies’ or ‘virtual reality technologies’, but also ‘new materials’ such as smart materials and structures, high-temperature superconducting technologies, and highly efficient energy materials technologies; and, of course, AI (Artificial Intelligence).
In a just released report, Elsa Kania at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) writes: “China is no longer in a position of technological inferiority relative to the United States but rather has become a true peer (competitor) that may have the capability to overtake the United States in AI,” she adds: “it could alter future economic and military balances of power.”
Beijing has also ‘megaprojects for assimilating and absorbing’ technology; an import substitution action plan in order to create indigenous innovations through ‘co-innovation’ and ‘re-innovation’ of foreign technologies. The megaprojects have an objective of ‘assimilating and absorbing’ to help China to ‘develop a range of major equipment and key products that possess proprietary intellectual property rights’
Xi Jinping has a Dream, the great rejuvenation of Chinese nation: “It is an unstoppable historical trend that won't be diverted by the will of any individual country or person,” asserts China Military Online.
Does Delhi even realise the true objective behind the Chinese Dream, which is to make of China a dominant, self-reliant superpower? India has ‘certainly’ something to learn from the Middle Kingdom in terms of ‘dreaming’.
China has its own problems; one is the rigidity of its bureaucracy functioning under the Communist Party, but even if the present Chinese system is not congenial to innovations, considering its structure and the restrictions imposed by the unique Party system, Beijing is going full steam with the most-advanced researches.
In India, the defence sector still depends in a large measure on imports. One of the reasons is the lack of large-scale R&D. This is a serious problem. Take the example of Dassault Aviation; after the constructor of the Rafale was selected in the Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) project, it expressed some doubts about the capacity of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) to absorb French technology; without even speaking about ‘innovations’, HAL could not ‘digest’ the French technology.
The Modi sarkar has tried to partially solve the issue by introducing 50 per cent offsets that Dassault and its partners need to reinvest in India. Tremendous efforts need to be made in the domain of ‘research’, if India is serious about catching up with China and the West in the domain of ‘innovation’.
Will the Indian system able to be a top-class innovator is the real question? China, like India, suffers from bureaucratic deficiencies, but the leadership in Beijing has a tremendous political will (and adequate economic means) to change this scenario in the years to come; it does not seem the case in India.
The Indian Dream has been partially formulated with the ‘Make in India’ scheme, but even if succeeds, it will not solve the R&D issue. It is a great pity, because the ingredients (brains) are very much present.

The Indian Village in Tibet

I am posting an interesting report from the Special Officer appointed by the Government of Jammu and Kashmir to visit Minsar, the Indian enclave in Tibet in Summer 1950. After the report is a historical note on Minsar.

On August 26, 1950, the Government of Jammu and Kashmir (Prime Minister’s Secretariat - External Affairs Department) writes to the Ministry of States in New Delhi to inform it  about the circumstances of the Special Officer’s visit to Tibet.
The communication is entitled: ‘Village Minsar in Western Tibet'.

...the State Government have already deputed a Civil Officer, Mr. N. Rigzen Ghagil Kalon, with an escort of armed police to visit Minsar village. From the last report received from Mr. Kalon it appears that the Tibetan Govt have put restrictions on people entering their territory with arms. His report further indicates that he reached Rudok on 3rd June, 1950 leaving the police escort behind at Chuchhol [Chushul] a border village on the side of the Jammu and Kashmir State.
At Rudok the Civil Officer was informed by the Tibetan Govt officials that he could proceed to Minsar without an armed escort. Subsequent report from the Chief administrative Officer Leh shows that the Civil Officer along with some constables in civilian dress and without arms are on their way to Minsar.

Follows the report from Rigzen Ghagil Kalon, the Special Officer (Minsar) to the Chief Administrative Officer (Leh). It is dated September 13, 1950, a few weeks before the entry of the Chinese in Western Tibet.
The report is entitled: “Note on condition of the inhabitants of Kashmir Village Minsar in Western Tibet”. Note that Demchok is clearly the last border village in Ladakh; it is now 'disputed' by China.

In compliance to your orders I left Leh on 22-6-50 and reached village Minsar on 24-7-50. The route lies via Rudok. It is ten days journey from Demjok [Demchok] to Minsar. Demjok is the last boundary of the Tehsil Ladakh from which begins the Chhangthang Plateau of Lhasa Tibet. The route from Demjok to Minsar passes through Gartok which is the headquarters of Garpons (Administrative Officers of Lhasa Government). The village Minsar is situated to east of Gartok and about 32 miles west of Mount Kailasas [Kailash]. It is a broad valley with vast plains in it.
There are 68 families with 271 souls of which 120 are males and the rest females and are all adherents of Buddhism.
The entire population depends on livestock which is the only source of subsistence and deal in the trade of sheep, wool, and pashmina. The economic condition of the people is neither much satisfactory nor so much frustrated.
On my way I interviewed Garpons at Rudok and exchanged my ideas with them regarding taking my Police Constables to Minsar and installation of a Chowki [guardian] there. They told me that it would create some consternation in Minsar and its suburbs, if the whole quota of six constables along with rifles were permitted to accompany me and so two constables were permitted to accompany me and the rifles were kept concealed under our saddles. I directed the other four constables to stay at Demjok. I also came across with the traders of Kulu [in Himachal Pradesh] and Leh there. They came with an application to me saying that Tibetan Officials were demanding Custom Duty for their livestock and goods which was not supported by any Rule or Regulation in this behalf. I accordingly went to see the Tibetan Officials and discussed the point with them. They were fully convinced by my arguments that the practice was illegal and they agreed to stop it in future.
The various passengers who had met me on way had already intimated to the people of the village Minsar about me and had accordingly arranged a Tumboo (tent of Yak hair) for my lodging. The Numberdar [hereditary title for powerful families of zamindars of a village or town] and few distinguished persons of the place received me heartily. On the following day I had a discourse with the inhabitants of the place and we exchanged our ideas. I found there a few Garhwal tradesmen who did a lot of propaganda in my favour among the people telling them that I belonged to the National Government of Jammu and Kashmir which is a part of India. It proved a great help to me. I asked for the recovery of revenue and the people told me that they had not the least hesitation in paying the amount to the State Govt., but they had a few grievances against our Government which despite their several representations made at Leh, were not heeded to and no action was taken. They expressed that this attitude of our Government had extremely disgusted them and they wanted an immediate redress before payment of revenue. The grievances are as follows:-

1. No help was extended to them at the time of the incursion of the Kazaks. The Kazak raid had wholly ravaged their villages and looted and ruined their monasteries. The figures of personal properties of the people leaving aside the monastic wealth were cash Rs. 25000/-, horses 140, yaks 404, and sheep 4889.
2. The people are subjected to the payment of puggur dues (goods sold by the Tibetan Officials to their subjects at exorbitant price) which is a gross injustice of the Tibetan Government on the people. A few days before my arrival there a Tibetan Official called Urkoo had sent goods such as tea etc worth Rs. 672/- to the village for forced sale for which the villagers had to pay Rs. 1548/- as cost price to Urkoo.
3. An Official from our Government should stay there annually at least for three months in summer who will look after the general situation of the place.
4. The people have to supply free transport to the Tibetan officials. The transport engaged by the Tibetan for other purposes such as carriage of goods etc are paid at normal wages of three pice for 32 miles per pony.

In respect of items 2 and 4 it is requested that the Tibetan Government be contacted to stop this mal-practice forthwith which will go a long way in mitigating the troubles and the people will welcome our Government and do whatever we ask them to do.
I contacted the Urkoo who had sent his goods to Minsar and told him to postpone the sale of goods to people for the present till I submit my report to my Government and the requisite orders whether the sale of goods should be made or not are conveyed to his Government by my Government.
I saw on my way orders of the Tibetan Government affixed on all stages to the effect that no Puggur dues and free transport should be demanded. On my return journey I discussed this point with the high Garpon at Gartok and asked him as to how these mal-practices were in vogue in contravention to the clear and explicit orders in this behalf. Garpon told me in reply that as Minsar virtually formed a part of Government of Lhasa and so the Tibetan Officials were right to enforce their laws in the said territory. He also said that Kashmir Government was only to collect revenue annually from the village as done heretofore and for all other administrative purposes the village constitutes a part of Lhasa Government. I asked him to give it in writing to which he showed reluctance and I could easily infer that he had no such document with him by which he was justifying his action.
From the foregoing observations it transpires that our Government has not so far taken any steps in setting up our administration there. It is submitted that speedy measures may please be taken to alleviate the trouble and miseries of the people of this forgotten place which will assure the loyalty of subjects.
No other political condition worth mention needs to be incorporated in the report.

A historical Note on Minsar
Before the invasion of the Roof of the World by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in 1950, India had a small territory in Tibet. This village is called Minsar.
For centuries, the inhabitants of Minsar, although surrounded by Tibetan territories, paid their taxes to the kingdom of Ladakh. During in the 19th century, when Ladakh was incorporated into Maharaja Gulab Singh’s State, Minsar de facto became a part of the Jammu & Kashmir State.
In October 1947, after Maharaja Hari Singh signed the Instrument of Accession, Minsar became Indian territory.
This lasted till the mid 1950s.
John Bray, the President of the International Association of Ladakh Studies, who wrote about the Bhutanese and Indian (Minsar) enclaves in Tibet, noted: “Both sets of enclaves share a common origin in that they date back to the period when the Kings of Ladakh controlled the whole of Western Tibet. The link with Bhutan arises because of the Ladakhi royal family’s association with the Drukpa Kagyupa sect.”
This school of Buddhism, different of the Dalai Lama’s Gelukpa has been influential in Ladakh and Bhutan for centuries.
The rights to the small town of Minsar were inherited from the Peace Treaty between Ladakh and Tibet signed in Tingmosgang in 1684. Besides the confirmation of the delimitation of the border between Western Tibet and Ladakh, the Treaty affirmed: “The king of Ladakh reserves to himself the village of Minsar in Ngari-khor-sum [Western Tibet]”. For centuries, Minsar was a home for Ladakhi and Kashmiri traders and pilgrims visiting the holy mountain.
A report of Thrinley Shingta, the 7th Gyalwang Drukpa, head of the Drukpa school of Tibetan Buddhism, who spent three months in the area in 1748, makes interesting reading: “Administratively, it is established that the immediate village of Minsar and its surrounding areas are ancient Ladakhi territory. After Lhasa invaded West Tibet in 1684, it was agreed and formally inscribed in the Peace Treaty between Tibet and Ladakh, signed in 1684, that the King of Ladakh retained the territory of Minsar and its neighbourhood as a territorial enclave, in order to meet the religious offering expenses of the sacred sites by Lake Manasarovar and Mount Kailash.”

Minsar today

The Panchsheel Agreement
In 1953, wanting to sign his Panchsheel Agreement with China, Jawaharlal Nehru decided to abandon all Indian ‘colonial’ rights inherited from the British. Though he knew that the small principality was part of the Indian territory, he felt uneasy about this Indian ‘possession’ near Mt. Kailash in Tibet. Nehru was aware that Minsar had been providing revenue to maintain the temples around the sacred mountain and the holy Manasarovar lake, but believed that India should unilaterally renounce her rights as a gesture of goodwill towards Communist China.
He instructed the diplomats negotiating the Panchsheel accord in Beijing: “Regarding the village of Minsar in Western Tibet, which has belonged to the Kashmir State, it is clear that we shall have to give it up, if this question is raised. We need not raise it. If it is raised, we should say that we recognize the strength of the Chinese contention and we are prepared to consider it and recommend it.”
Eventually Minsar was not discussed in 1954 during the talks for the Tibet (also known as Panchsheel) Agreement and, the Bhutanese enclaves could not be brought up during the India-China talks in 1960, as China refused to deal with Sikkim and Bhutan.
It means that the fate of these enclaves has never been negotiated or settled. It remains so today.
On December 31, 1953, while opening the ‘Tibet talks’ (without the participation of the Dalai Lama’s government), Premier Zhou Enlai affirmed: “all outstanding problems between China and other countries could be solved on basis of mutual respect for territorial integrity, non aggression and non-interference in internal affairs so as to enable peaceful co-existence. I know Prime Minister Nehru Government and people of India also feel the same way. On basis of this principle all outstanding questions between us which are ripe for settlement can be resolved smoothly.”
Minsar issue was never sorted out.

The Legal Position
We should remember that treaties, conventions or agreements signed by any states, do not depend on an individual or a political party; they remain in force whoever is in power. The Chinese occupation of Tibet did not change this fact.
Further, the return of any part Indian Territory needs to be ratified by the Indian Parliament only, through an amendment of the Constitution. Therefore the so-called ‘return’ of Minsar to Tibet (and China) is still today illegal and invalid in law.
John Bray wrote: "the Sino-Indian boundary dispute remains unresolved. Since the 1960s, the attention of the two governments has focused on the demarcation of the frontier and, more recently, on the prospects for mutual trade. The status of Minsar is no more than a minor footnote to these concerns, but one that has still to be cleared up."
Nehru’s perception that old treaties or conventions could be discarded or scraped greatly weakened the Indian stand in the 1950s (and later when China invaded India). Nehru’s wrong interpretation made it easy for the Chinese to tell their Indian counterparts “look here, McMahon was an imperialist, therefore the McMahon line is an imperialist fabrication, therefore it is illegal”.