Showing posts with label 1965. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1965. Show all posts

Sunday, August 2, 2020

Why we need to make way for a bold, new India

A Courageous Man
My article
Why we need to make way for a bold, new India appeared in Mail Today/DailyO


India is today at a crossroad. There are clearly two paths: one of cautiousness, one of boldness.

Historically, Indian diplomacy has played a balancing act between boldness and cautiousness; often tilting towards the latter. It was good news when External Affairs Minister Dr S Jaishankar stated a few days ago: “If India has to grow, it has to shed its traditional caution, be more confident and articulate its interests.”
It is indeed the need of the hour. The former diplomat, now minister added: “Either you’re in the game or you’re not in the game. The era of great caution and greater dependence on multilateralism is behind us. We need to take risks. Without taking risks, you can’t get ahead. Those are the choices we have to make.”

The first signs
Let us hope that the Modi government will implement the brave words of the minister and take steps in the right decision, especially at a time the situation is far from improving in Ladakh.
Flashback to October/November 1950: Tibet was unashamedly invaded by Communist China. A debate started in India about the importance of Tibet for India’s security and the necessity for Delhi to support the Dalai Lama’s independent nation (for centuries, a peaceful buffer between India and China).
Sardar Patel, the Deputy Prime Minister wrote his now-famous letter (drafted by a diplomat, Sir Girja Shankar Bajpai) to the Prime Minister; it was not answered and soon after Patel died. India had lost a golden opportunity to protect its frontiers.
At that time, a bright young Chinese-speaking IFS officer, Sumul Sinha, posted as Consulate General of India in Lhasa, tried to explain Tibet’s strategic value to his bosses in the Ministry of External Affairs and Commonwealth (Nehru was the Foreign Minister); but Sinha was admonished for not grasping India’s policy of peaceful co-existence.

Ignored warnings
In an internal cable, Nehru wrote to Sinha: “For this reason [world peace], we avoid as far as possible strong language and condemnation of nations …it only increases international tension.”
And then the crux of the Prime Minister’s new credo: “Emergence of strong centralised Government of China, with a revolutionary urge, has been the most significant fact of the present generation. This affects India and the future of Asia depends upon the relationship of India with China.”
The cable continues to eulogise China’s revolution: “This may be a factor for stability and peace of the world or danger to us and to world peace. For this reason, we tried to cultivate friendly relations with China and we believe that this became a stabilising factor.”
During the following years, Sinha would be blasted repeatedly for warning Nehru of the true intentions of Communist China; sadly, he was ignored.
On February 22, 2018, Foreign Secretary Vijay Gokhale requested PK Sinha, the Cabinet Secretary, to issue a “classified circular advisory advising all Ministries/Departments of Government of India as well as State Governments not to accept any invitation or to participate in the proposed commemorative events [of the 60th anniversary of the Dalai Lama’s arrival in India].”
The directive banned the participation of government servants in the Tibet events, “accordingly, you are requested to ensure appropriate action in the matter,” Sinha was told.
Retrospectively, did this help India …or China? It only emboldened China a great deal.
In September 1965, when the ‘Question of Tibet’ came up at the UN General Assembly in New York, Rafiq Zakaria, the Indian Permanent Representative gave a forceful speech during the debate for voting a resolution condemning China. The speech was to the point defending India’s interests as well as supporting Tibet.
Zakaria first mentioned the situation in Tibet between 1959 and 1965 asserting: “Ever since Tibet came under the stranglehold of China, the Tibetans have been subjected to increasing ruthlessness. In the name of introducing 'democratic reforms’ and fighting a ‘counter-revolution’, the Chinese have indulged in the worst kind genocide and the suppression of a minority race.”
The diplomat said China tried: “to destroy the national, ethnical, racial and religious group of Tibetans by killing members of the group. Although the relationship between Tibet and India is centuries old and has flourished all through the ages, we have always taken care not to make that relationship a political problem. Our hearts go out to them in their plight and in terrible suppression that they are suffering at the hands of the Government of the People's Republic of China.”

A question of choice
India is today at a crossroad, there are clearly two paths, one of cautiousness, one of boldness; the first approach (without speaking of over-cautiousness) has led the nation nowhere; in the present planetary conditions, it is far better for India to be frank, honest and daring, while at the same time remaining truthful to India’s eternal values. And for this India need not be aligned with anyone in particular.
The world will be one day be grateful to India if the politicians are able to do that.

Wednesday, July 22, 2020

Between Boldness and Cautiousness

UN Session on the Question of Tibet, 1965
External Affairs Minister Dr S. Jaishankar yesterday stated that “If India has to grow, it has to shed its traditional caution, step out more, be more confident and articulate its interests.”
That sounds good.
The former diplomat, now minister added: “If we are to grow by leveraging the international situation, we have to exploit the opportunities out there. Can’t do that by saying, ‘I’m going to stay away from it all, and when I find it convenient I will step out’. Either you’re in the game or you’re not in the game. The era of great caution and greater dependence on multilateralism, is behind us. We have to step out more. We have to be more confident, we have to articulate our interests better. We need to take risks. Without taking risks, you can’t get ahead. Those are choices we have to make.”
Let us hope that his government will make the right decision.

The Vijay Gokhale Directive
We still remember that on February 22, 2018, Foreign Secretary Vijay Gokhale, a former Indian ambassador to Beijing, requested PK Sinha, the Cabinet Secretary  to issue a “classified circular advisory advising all Ministries/Departments of Government of India as well as State Governments not to accept any invitation or to participate in the proposed commemorative events [of the 60th anniversary of the Dalai Lama's arrival in India].”
Addressed to the secretaries and heads of government departments,the directive banned the participation of government servants in the events to mark the start of 60 years in exile of the Dalai Lama; "it should be discouraged", said the note and “accordingly, you are requested to ensure appropriate action in the matter”.
The Indian Express then wrote: “In an unusual departure from its stand on the Tibetans-in-exile, the government, underlining that this is a ‘very sensitive time’ for bilateral relations with China, has sent out a note asking ‘senior leaders’ and ‘government functionaries’ of the Centre and states to stay away from events planned for March-end and early April by the ‘Tibetan leadership in India’ to mark the start of 60 years in exile of the Dalai Lama.”
Sinha quoted Gokhale’s note to underline “the sensitive nature of the subject.”
That was cautiousness at the extreme.
Retrospectively, did this help India …or China?
In my opinion, it emboldened China a great deal.
That is why is good that Dr Jaishankar speaks now of shedding its traditional caution.

Bolder Times
This reminds me another era, other times, when India was still bold.
The Prime Minister might have been short, but he was a Tall Leader.
Just read the statement of Rafiq Zakaria, the Indian Permanent Representative at the UN General Assembly in New York during a debate on the ‘Question of Tibet’ in 1965, you will understand.
That was bold and to the point; defending India's interests as well as supporting Tibet.
Eventually, the UN General Assembly passed a Resolution in favour of Tibet; what was interesting was that while during the previous sessions in 1959 and 1961, India had abstained from voting, in 1965, India voted in favour of the Resolution.
The full text of the Indian Representative is given below.

Tibetan delegates in 1965
(Rinchen Sadhuthsang, Tsepon Shakabpa, Gyalo Thodup)
Statement by Shri Rajiq Zakaria (India):
As representatives are aware, for the past fifteen years the question of Tibet has been from time to time under the consideration of the United Nations.
It was first raised here in 1950 at the Fifth Session of the General Assembly but it could not be placed on the agenda.
In fact, my country opposed its inclusion at that time because we were assured by China that it was anxious to settle the problem by peaceful means. However, instead of improving, the situation in Tibet began to worsen, and since then the question has come up several times before the General Assembly of the United Nations.
Our delegations participated in the discussion at the Fourteenth Session in 1959 and although we abstained from voting, we made it clear that because of our close historical, cultural and religious ties with the Tibetans, we could not but be deeply moved and affected by what was happening in that region.
We hoped against hope that wiser counsel would prevail among the Chinese and that there would be an end to the sufferings of the people of Tibet.
However, the passage of time has completely belied our hopes. As the day pass, the situation becomes worse and cries out for the attention of all mankind. As we know, ever since Tibet came under the stranglehold of China, the Tibetans have been subjected to a continuous and increasing ruthlessness which has few parallel in the annals of the world. In the name of introducing 'democratic reforms’ and fighting a ‘counter-revolution’, the Chinese have indulged in the worst kind genocide and the suppression of a minority race.
To begin with, we in India were hopeful that, as contacts between the Chinese and the Tibetans under the changed set-up became closer and more intimate, more harmonious relationship would emerge. In fact, in 1956, as a result of the long talks with Mr. Chou En-lai the Chinese Premier, my late Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru felt confident that a mutually agreeable adjustment between the two peoples would be established.
Even the Dalai Lama expressed a similar hope to our late Prime Minister, but, as subsequent events have proved, the Chinese never believed in living up to their assurances. They promised autonomy to Tibet and the safeguarding of its culture and religious heritage and traditions but, as the International Commission of Jurists its June 1959 report on Tibet has emphasised they attempted on the contrary:
To destroy the national, ethnical, racial and religious group of Tibetans as such by killing members of the group and by causing serious bodily and mental harm to members of the group.
The world is aware that it was in protest against and enslavement of Tibet that the Dalai Lama, who is held in the highest esteem by all Tibetans and, indeed, respected as a spiritual leader by all Indians - fled From Lhasa and took asylum in India. Today there are thousands of Tibetan refugees in my country; approximately 50,000 who have left their hearth and homes and fled from their country to loin their leader and seek refuge in India. The flight of these refugees still continues, far the Chinese have transformed Tibet into a vast military camp, where the indigenous Tibetans are made to live like hewers of wood and drawers of water.
Although the relationship between Tibet and India is centuries old and has flourished all through the ages in all its manifestations, whether religious, cultural or economic, we have always token care not to make that relationship a political problem. In recent years, despite the fact the Dalai Lama and thousands of his Tibetan followers have come to our land, and despite the fact that China has turned Tibet itself into a base of aggression against our northern borders, we have not exploited the situation.
Undoubtedly, our notional sentiments are now and again aroused as a result of the atrocities and cruelties committed by the Chinese against Tibetans, but we have exercised the greatest caution, for we believe that what should concern all of us is the much larger human problem, namely the plight of these good and innocent people who are victimised merely because they are different, ethnically and culturally, from the Chinese.
Here I feel that it would not be out of place to put before this august Assembly the following facts which stand out stubbornly and irrefutably in connection with Chinese policy in Tibet.
  1. The autonomy guaranteed in Sino-Tibetan Agreement of 1951 has from the beginning remained a dead letter.
  2. Through increasing application of military force, the Chinese have in fact obliterated the autonomous character of Tibet.
  3. There has been arbitrary confiscation of properties belonging to monasteries and individuals and Tibetan Government institutions.
  4. Freedom of religion is denied to the Tibetans, and Buddhism is being suppressed together with the system of priests, monasteries, shrines and monuments.
  5. The Tibetans are allowed no freedom of information or expression.
  6. There has also been carried out a systematic policy of killing, imprisonment and deportation of those Tibetans who have been active in their opposition to Chinese rule.
  7. The Chinese have forcibly transferred large numbers of Tibetan children in China in order to denationalise them, to indoctrinate them in Chinese ideology and to make them forget their own Tibetan religion, culture and way of life, and
  8. There has also been a large-scale attempt to bring Han Chinese into Tibet, and thereby make Tibet Chinese and overwhelm the indigenous people with a more numerous Chinese population.
These atrocities, carried out ruthlessly with utter disregard for Tibetan sentiments and aspirations, and in complete violation of universally recognised human rights, and up to a frightful programmed of the suppression of a whole people. It surpasses anything that colonialists have done in the past to the peoples whom they ruled as slaves. That is why the United Nations General Assembly took note of the situation in Tibet and passed two resolutions, one in 1959 and the other in 1961, deploring the denial of these human rights to the people of Tibet by the Chinese Government and appearing to it to restore these rights to the Tibetan people. But all such pleas have fallen on deaf ears, is this situation not a challenge to human conscience?
Can we, dedicated as we are here to the Charter of the United Nations, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, remain mute spectators to the ghostly tragedy that is being enacted by a ruthless and oppressive regime in Tibet?
In a recent appeal to the Secretary General of the United Nations and to the Member States, which is contained in Document A/608 1, the Dalai Lama, who has been a model of restraint, serenity and, indeed, of humanity, has warned the Organisation that the Chinese's, if unchecked would resort to still more brutal means of exterminating the Tibetan race. There is no limit to the hardships that the Tibetan people are suffering. Even their supply of food is restricted and controlled by the Chinese who first feed their military forces in Tibet, and then whatever remains is given to the ingenious Tibetans. My delegation naturally feels concerned about the terrible deterioration of the situation in Tibet.
On December 17, 1964, for instance, the Dalai Lama was formally deprived of his position as Chairman of the Preparatory Committee for the Autonomous Region of Tibet and denounced as 'an incorrigible running dog of imperialism and foreign reactionaries’, this was immediately followed by the disposition an December 30, 1964 of the Panchen Lama, whom the Chinese tried assiduously to take under their wing, and by his condemnation as a leader of the clique of reactionary serf owner.
Thus the Chinese have severed the remaining political links between Tibet and its two politico-religious structures, and have given a final blow to what they fondly used to call, in the past ‘The Special status of Tibet’.
Moreover, the campaign to dispossess Tibetan peasants of their land and to distribute their properties is also being accelerated with the definition of what precisely constitutes Feudal elements being expanded, from time to time to cover a wider and wider range of peasants. In fact, those so-called land reforms are being used by the Chinese Government to advance its own political purpose and to turn the Tibetan peasants into slaves of its system. The naked truth - which all of us must face - is that the Chinese Government is determined to obliterate the Tibetan people, but surely no people can remain for long suppressed. I have faith in the world community. I believe it will be able to help restore to the Tibetans all the freedom which we hove enshrined, with such dedication, in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
For our part, we assure the United Nation that - as in the past - we shall continue to give all facilities to the Tibetan refugees, and do our best to alleviate their sufferings and hardships, the Dalai Lama has been living in India for some years now, and is carrying on his religious humanitarian activities without any restriction from us. We shall continue to give the Dalai Lama and his simple and peace loving people these facilities and all our hospitality.
It is for these reasons that we support, fully and wholeheartedly, the cause of the people of Tibet. Our hearts go out to them in their miserable plight and in terrible suppression that they are suffering at the hands of the Government of the People's Republic of China. Although that regime has given us, and continues to give us, provocation, we have refused to use the Tibetan refugees as pawns in our conflict with China. We do not believe that the sufferings of one people should be made a weapon in the armoury of another. 'In the end, may I express the fervent an behalf of the United Nations that there would soon be an end to the reign of misery and oppression in Tibet and that the people of Tibet will be able to shore with us all those human rights that all of us, in different lands are so fortunate to possess and enjoy.

My delegation will, therefore, vote in favour of the draft resolution contained in Document A/L.473, and I commend the same to this august Assembly.

Thursday, September 24, 2015

China 'intervention' during the 1965 conflict

Analysts celebrate the 50th anniversary of the 1965 Indo-Pakistan conflict.
In this connection, I am posting 4 Appendixes published by the Ministry Of External Affairs in the Notes, Memoranda And Letters Exchanged Between The Government Of India And China between January 1965 and February 1966 (known as White Paper No. XII).
These Appendixes deal with the Chinese 'intervention' in the conflict.
The correspondence between Delhi and Beijing is available in the White Paper XII, which can be downloaded from my website.
All the 14 White Papers on China are now available.
On September 23, 1965, The Hindu published the following article entitled 'Chinese intrude at three points'
The Chinese have intruded into Indian territory in Ladakh, in the middle sector and in Sikkim. The intrusion varies from two to three miles in the middle sector to a few hundred yards in Ladakh and in Sikkim. In the Dongchu La in Sikkim, the Chinese have intruded 800 yards into Indian territory. There was no exchange of fire between Indian and Chinese forces to-day [September 22], according to an official spokesman. The spokesman said he could not say what the Chinese would do at the expiry of the extended time limit at 9-30 to-night [September 22]. The Chinese posture was provocative. They were still on the border and at some points across the border in Indian territory. He could not say whether the Chinese would see good sense or do something more than what they had done already. The spokesman said that he had no confirmation of the New China News Agency report that Chinese forces had withdrawn from four points in the Sikkim and other sectors. According to reports received by the Defence Ministry, in the Sikkim sector, the Chinese continue to build up their positions and strength right up to the border.

APPENDIX I 

Statement of the Government of the People's Republic of China, 7, September, 1965.

On September 6, 1965, India suddenly launched an armed attack on Pakistan. Indian troops have crossed the International Boundary between India and Pakistan and are pushing towards Lahore, the Capital of West Pakistan. The Indian radio has announced general mobilization. Thus the Indian Government has enlarged the local conflict between India and Pakistan in Kashmir into a general conflict between the two countries. In the face of the massive armed attack by India, the President of Pakistan has called on the entire people of the country to rise in resistance against the enemy and appealed for sympathy and support from all peace-loving peoples of the world.
The Indian Government's armed attack on Pakistan is an act of naked aggression. It not only is a crude violation of all principles guiding international relations but also constitutes a grave threat to peace in this part of Asia. The Chinese Government sternly condemns India for its criminal aggression, expresses firm support for Pakistan in its just struggle aggression and solemnly warns the Indian Government that it must bear responsibility for all the consequences of its criminal and extended aggression.
The Indian Government has always been perfidious on the Kashmir question. It once pledged solemnly with Pakistan to grant the Kashmiri people the right of self-determination. But far from honouring its pledge it has brazenly declared that Kashmir is an integral part of India and subjected the Kashmiri people to brutal national oppression. Where there is oppression, there will be resistance. It is entirely proper that the people in the Indian occupied area of Kashmir should rise up in resistance. In order to cover up its sanguinary suppression of the Kashmiri people, the Indian Government openly breached the cease-fire line in the disputed territory of Kashmir to intrude into the area under the control of Pakistan and carried out military provocations and armed occupation. This, of course, could not but arouse Pakistan to counter attack in self-defence. All this was in the nature of a local conflict in the disputed territory of Kashmir between India and Pakistan.
India already committed aggression on the Kashmir issue. Now it has openly launched a massive armed attack on Pakistan. This is a still more serious act of aggression.
The United Nations has always had an ill-fame on the Kashmir question. It solemnly pledged to guarantee national self-determination for Kashmir. However, 18 years have passed during which the United Nations watched on without lifting a finger while India acted lawlessly in Kashmir. The United Nations did not breathe a single word when India violated the cease-fire line. But as soon as Pakistan fought back in self-defence, the United Nations came out to mediate. This is by no means the end of the story. It is unconceivable that the United Nations, which has been unfair for 18 years, should suddenly become fair. The so-called mediation by the United Nations is based on a report of the Secretary General. The report itself is unfair. How can a fair conclusion be drawn from an unfair premise? On the Kashmir question, the United Nations has once again proved a tool of U.S. imperialism and its partners in their attempt to control the whole world. This will be further proved true during the current extended aggression against Pakistan by India.
India's armed aggression against Pakistan is another exposure of the chauvinist and expansionist features of its ruling circles. The Indian Government glibly says that it pursues a policy of so-called peaceful co-existence. But actually it has never ceased for a single day its activities of bullying and encroaching upon its neighbours wherever possible. Almost every neighbour of India has known this from its own experience. The Indian ruling circles are the greatest hypocrites in contemporary international life. The Chinese people have had a deep experience of this. Although the Indian ruling circles did not gain anything from their massive armed attack on China in October, 1962, they have never stopped making intrusions and provocations along the Sino-Indian border. India is still entrenched on Chinese territory on the Sino-Sikkim border and has not withdrawn. It is constantly probing furtively and making intrusions and harassment against Chinese territory in the Western sector of the Sino-Indian border. Indian violations of Chinese territory are far from coming to an end. The Chinese Government has served repeated warnings, and it is now closely following the development of India's acts of aggression and strengthening its defences and heightening its alertness along its border.
The Indian Government probably believes that since it has the backing of the U.S. imperialists and the modern revisionists it can bully its neighbours, defy public opinion and do whatever it likes. This will not do. Aggression is aggression. India's aggression against any one of its neighbours concerns all of its neighbours. Since the Indian Government has taken the first step in committing aggression against Pakistan, it cannot evade responsibility for the chain of consequences arising therefrom.
The Chinese Government is deeply convinced that, with the sympathy and support of the peace-loving countries and peoples of Asia and the whole world, the hundred million people of Pakistan will rise as one-man to save their country and finally drive back the Indian aggressors.


APPENDIX II
Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri's Statement in Parliament, 17 September, 1965

I want to inform the House that this morning we received a communication from the Chinese Government demanding that within three days we should dismantle our defence installations which they allege are located on their Side of the border in Tibet across the Sikkim border. I might for the benefit of the House, read out the relevant portions of the communication, although I would be placing the communication and our reply on the Table of the House.
"In its notes the Indian Government continues to resort to its usual subterfuges in an attempt to deny the intruding activities of Indian troops along the Sino-Indian boundary and the China-Sikkim boundary. This attempt cannot possibly succeed. Since ceasefire and troop withdrawal were effected along the Sino-Indian border by China on her own initiative in 1962, Indian troops have never stopped their provocations, and there have been more than 300 intrusions into China either by ground or by air. The Chinese Government has repeatedly lodged protests with the Indian Government and served warnings to it, and has successively notified some friendly countries. The facts are there, and they cannot be denied by the Indian Government by mere quibbling. Moreover, the Chinese Government has four times proposed (the latest occasion in June 1965) Sino­ Indian Joint Investigation into India's illegal construction of military works for aggression on the Chinese side of the China-Sikkim boundary, but has each time been refused by the Indian Government. Now the Indian Government pretentiously says that the matter can be settled if only an independent and neutral observer should go to the border to see for himself. It further shamelessly asserts that Indian troops have never crossed the Sikkim-China boundary which has been formally delimited, and that India has not built any military works either on the Chinese side of the border or on the border itself. This is a barefaced lie. How can it hope to deceive anyone?
“As is known to everybody, the Indian Government has long been using the territory of Sikkim against China. Since September 1962, not to mention earlier times, Indian troops have crossed the China-Sikkim boundary, which was delimited long ago, and have built a large number of military works for aggression either on the Chinese side of the China-Sikkim boundary or on the boundary itself. There are now fifty six such military works, large and small which they helve built in the past few years all over the important passes along the China-Sikkim boundary, thus wantonly encroaching upon China's territory and violating her sovereignty. In these years the Chinese Government has made thirteen representations to the Indian Government. But the Indian Government has all along turned a deaf ear to them and does not have the slightest respect for China's sovereignty and territorial integrity. Far from stopping its acts of aggression, the Indian Government has intensified them by ordering its troops to intrude into Chinese territory for reconnaissance and provocations.”
We are sending a reply to all these points and as I said I shall place the reply on the table of the House. I will read out the relevant portions of our reply.
"Ever since the Sino-Indian border problem was raised by the Chinese Government, the Government of India had made strenuous attempts to settle the question peacefully and with honour. Even after the unprovoked Chinese attack across the border in October­ November, 1962, the Government of India consistently followed the policy of seeking a peaceful settlement honourable to both the parties concerned.
As has been pointed out in various notes to the Chinese Government in the past, the Government of India has given strict instructions to its armed forces and personnel not to cross the international boundary in the Eastern and the Middle Sectors and the so-called 'line of actual control' in the Western Sector. The Government of India are satisfied after careful and detailed investigations, that Indian personnel as well as aircraft have fully carried out their instructions and have not transgressed the international boundary and the 'line of actual control' in the Western Sector at any time at any place. The Government of India are, therefore, absolutely convinced that the allegations contained in the Chinese note under reply are completely groundless. The Government of India are constrained to reject these allegations and to reassert emphatically that they do not accept the claims to vast areas of Indian territory in the Western, Middle and Eastern Sectors of the border put forward in the Chinese note under reply. As regards China's stand on Kashmir and on the present unfortunate conflict between India and Pakistan, it is nothing but interference on the part of China calculated to prolong and to enlarge the conflict."
The background of the matter is that in September 1962 some defence structures were constructed on the Sikkim side of the Sino­ Indian frontier. These structures have not been in occupation since the cessation of hostilities in November, 1962. Since the Chinese Government alleged that some of these structures were on their side of the border, India had in its note of September 12, 1965 gone to the extent of suggesting that an independent Observer be allowed to go this border to see for himself the actual state of affairs. The Chinese Government has not, unfortunately, accepted this reasonable proposal and has reiterated its proposal for joint inspection. In our reply which is being sent today, we are informing the Chinese Government that their contention is entirely incorrect. Nevertheless, as an earnest of our desire to give no ground to the Chinese for making this a pretext for aggressive action, we are informing them that we have no objection to a joint inspection of those points of the Sikkim-Tibet border where Indian personnel are alleged to have set up military structures in Tibetan territory. The Government of India on their part are prepared to arrange such an inspection as early as possible, at an appropriate official level, on a mutually convenient date.
We have sent a reply to the Chinese note accordingly and hope that Chinese Government would agree to action being taken as proposed. Copies of the Chinese note and of our reply have been placed on the table of the House.
I know the House would feel concerned about the intentions of the Chinese Government. We do hope that China would not take advantage of the present situation and attack India. The House may rest assured that we are fully vigilant and that if we are attacked, we shall fight for our freedom with grim determination. The might of China will not deter us from defending our territorial integrity. I shall keep the House informed of further developments.


APPENDIX III

Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri's Statement in Parliament, 20 September, 1965


I place on the Table of the House the text of a further note which was handed over to our Charge d'Affaires in Peking yesterday.
The House will recall that we had taken an attitude calculated to maintain peace when replying to the last note which we had received from the Chinese Government. It is clear from the kind of response which China has sent that what China is looking for is not a redress of grievances, real or imaginary, but some excuse to start its aggressive activities again, this time acting in collusion with its ally, Pakistan. The extension of the time-limit for the ultimatum was, in our view, no more than a device to gain time to watch what comes out of the discussions in the Security Council.
The allegations which China has been making in the series of notes that it has been sending to us, are such that they would hardly justify any civilised Government in having recourse to force, even if the allegations were true. If there are any structures on Chinese territory in areas where the border is delimited and not in dispute even according to the Chinese, surely, there is nothing to prevent the Chinese Government from having them removed, instead of suggesting to us that we should have them removed, which would only be possible by our men going into their territory. Similarly, no one can imagine that any Government would threaten another on the ground that their cattle have been lifted or on the ground that out of the thousands of Tibetans who have sought asylum in this country two or four are being detained here against their wishes.
To justify its aggressive attitude, China is pretending to be a guardian of Asian countries who, according to China, are being bullied by India. The basic objective of China, therefore, is to claim for itself a position of dominance in Asia which no self­ respecting nation in Asia is prepared to recognise. Large or small, strong or weak, every country in Asia has the fullest right to preserve its independence and sovereignty on terms of equality. The dominance of the Chinese cannot be accepted by any of them. We reject China's claim to tell us anything about what we should or should not do about Kashmir which is an integral part of India. Our offer of resolving the differences over these minor matters by peaceful means is still open.
However, China's aggressive intentions are clear from the fact that even while they have in their note extended the time-limit by 72 hours, in actual fact they have started firing at our border posts both in Sikkim and in Ladakh.
If, China persists in aggression, we shall defend ourselves by all means at our disposal.
A formal reply to the Chinese note will be sent later today.
May I say a word that we have just now received the full text of the resolution passed in the Security Council? Naturally, it deserves our very careful consideration, and I might be making a statement on that tomorrow in the House.


APPENDIX IV
Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri's Statement in both the Houses of Parliament, 22 September, 1965

I place on the table of the House a copy of the Security Council resolution, dated the 20th September, 1965, relating to the current conflict between India and Pakistan-a conflict which commenced on the 5th August, 1965, when Pakistan launched a massive attack on India by sending thousands of armed infiltrators across the cease­ fire line in our State of Jammu and Kashmir.
As the Hon'ble Members would see, the Security Council had demanded that both Governments should order a cease-fire effective from 12-30 p.m. Indian Standard Time today, the 22nd September, 1965. On the question of cease-fire, the views of the Government of India were stated in detail and without any ambiguity in my letters of September 14 and 15, 1965, addressed to the Secretary­ General. As stated in these letters, the Government of India had clearly accepted that they would order a cease-fire without any preconditions on being informed that Pakistan had agreed to do the same. On receiving the Security Council resolution, therefore, we sent a communication to the Secretary-General, in accordance with our earlier stand, informing him that we would be prepared to issue orders for a simple cease-fire effective from the appointed time and date, provided Pakistan agreed to do likewise. A copy of this communication is also placed on the Table of the House.
Throughout yesterday, there was no further message from the Secretary-General, but in the early hours of this morning we received a message from him advising us to order a unilateral cease-fire in compliance with the relevant provisions of the Security Council resolution, with the proviso that our troops could fire back if they were attacked. This, of course, was entirely impossible. In a battle which is continuing, it is just not possible for one side to ask its soldiers to stop firing, leaving the other side free to continue its operations. Our representative at the United Nations was, therefore, instructed to inform the Secretary-General accordingly.
A further report was received a short while ago that at the request of the Foreign Minister of Pakistan, an emergent meeting of the Security Council was convened, at which an announcement was made, on behalf of Pakistan that they also had agreed to issue orders for a cease-fire and cessation of hostilities. From our side, the requisite orders are now being issued to our field commanders to effect a complete cease-fire by 3-30 a.m. tomorrow morning.
The Security Council Resolution refers to other matters which will require consideration subsequently. However, the policy of the Government of India in regard to matters which are of vital importance to us and which relate to the present conflict, has been stated by me on more than one occasion on the floor of this House and also in my recent communications to the Secretary-General.
I do not propose to go into any further details at the present stage. Detailed discussions will have to take place and there would have to be a fuller study of the problems to which I have just referred. For this purpose, our representative at the United Nations will keep himself available to the Secretary-General.
There will now be a cessation of hostilities. Peace is good. However, there is still a threat from the Foreign Minister of Pakistan, which he held out today, while speaking in the Security Council. We have, therefore, to be very watchful and vigilant.
The nation has recently been going through its greatest trial. The times have been difficult but they have served a great purpose. The whole world knows now that the people of India-Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Parsees and others-constitute a united nation with a determined common will and purpose. On the battle front, the supreme sacrifice has been made by the members of all communities who have shown that they are Indians first and Indians last.
To our armed forces, I would like to pay on behalf of this Parliament and the entire country, our warmest tributes. By their valour and heroism, they have given a new confidence to the people of India. Those who have lost their beloved on the battle front, have made a contribution to the preservation of our independence which will never be forgotten by a grateful nation. Their sorrow and their pride are shared by the whole country.
Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would now seek your permission to express to all the members of this august House, to all the political parties in the country, to the leaders of public opinion, of labour organisations, of business and industry, and of many other voluntary associations, my feelings of the deepest gratitude. In the hour of trial each one of the 470 million people of this country stood up shoulder to shoulder to meet the challenge to our freedom.
I should like to inform the House that on 18th September, 1965, I received a message from Mr. Kosygin, Chairman of the Council of Ministers. USSR, offering his good offices for bringing about improved relations between India and Pakistan. Mr. Kosygin is impelled by noble intentions. No one can ever contest the view that ultimately India and Pakistan will have to live together as peaceful neighbours. We cannot therefore say no to any efforts, which may help to bring about such a situation, made by those who are sincere and genuine in their feelings of goodwill and friendship. I have therefore, informed Mr. Kosygin today that we would welcome his efforts and good offices.
I would also like to give the House some further details about the tragic incident in which the other day, we suffered a grievous loss. Investigations conducted on the spot show that the aircraft in which Shri Balvantray Mehta was travelling, was shot down by a Pakistani plane. The marks on the fuselage establish that gun fire had been used. Preliminary investigations by the Air Force authorities who also have visited the scene confirm that the aircraft was shot down at a low height. The ammunition recovered at the site of the crash also proves that the attacking aircraft was a Pakistani plane. That a non-combatant civilian aircraft should have been shot down in this manner is one of the most inhuman acts which we must all deplore and condemn. Shri Balvantrayji, his wife and the others who were travelling with him have laid down their lives at the altar of the freedom of the country. Their names will remain enshrined in our memory.
We are still faced with the Chinese ultimatum. The House is aware that almost at the same time when the Chinese Government announced the extension of the time-limit of the ultimatum to India by 72 hours on September 19, their troops started provocative activities at several points of the border. On the Sikkim border, about which the Chinese have been making baseless and threatening allegations, the Chinese troops crossed the well-known and delimited boundary at Dongchui La and Nathu La on 20th and 21st of September respectively. They fired at our observation posts. They have tried also to intrude into our other territories. Our armed forces have clear instructions to repel the aggressor.
Yesterday we sent a reply to the Chinese note of September 20 in which India was alleged to have intruded into Dum Chale and committed armed provocation. The Chinese charge was rejected as a fabrication and a cover-up for the intrusion and firing at Tsaskur to which I have referred a little while ago.
The House is aware that on September 19, the Chinese Government sent us a note couched in unbecoming language, extending the period of the ultimatum, making demands for destruction of military structures etc. A copy of our reply has been placed on the table of the House together with copies of two other notes we sent yesterday. Regarding the so-called military structures we have already told the Chinese Government that if after joint inspection any structures are found on the Tibetan side of the border there can be no objection to their being demolished. I have been told that China has announced that some of these so-called structures have been destroyed by our troops while withdrawing. All this is a product of their imagination.
I must tell the House that we view with grave concern the Chinese activities on the border and the armed intrusions into our territory. We have urged the Chinese Government in our note of September 21 replying to the Chinese note of September 19 to forsake the path of belligerence and intimidation and return to the path of peace and reason in its relations with India. I hope that even at this late hour China will respond to this call and prevent a major crisis.
We do not know what the Chinese will do next. We have, however, to remain vigilant all along the frontier.
There are times of the greatest trial for the nation, but the people all over the country are now in that mood which alone ensures the preservation of country's freedom. We may have to face many ups and downs, but I know the people have steeled themselves into a resolve to meet even this bigger challenge. On our Armed Forces, there may be a heavier responsibility. I have no doubt that they are in good spirits. We have no intention of underestimating the gravity of the situation. But we have resolved firmly to meet this challenge to our freedom.

Tuesday, November 6, 2012

The UN finally dared speaking



The UN finally dared speaking and questioning China's Tibet Policy.
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay sais: “I recognize Tibetans’ intense sense of frustration and despair which has led them to resort to such extreme means, but there are other ways to make those feelings clear.”
India is still very quiet on the issue.
It has not always been the case.
In 1965, India took a very strong stand at the UN. Here are some excerpts of the Indian Representative's remarks:
The United Nations General Assembly, Resolution 2079 (XX)
Remarks made in the United Nations General Assembly - 20th Session - 1394th Plenary Meeting. New York. UN Doc. A/PV.1394


Mr. Zakaria (India): As representatives are aware, for the past fifteen years the question of Tibet has been, from time to time, under the consideration of the United Nations. It was first raised here in 1950 at the fifth session of the General Assembly, but it could not be placed on the agenda. In fact, my country opposed its inclusion at that time because we were assured by China that it was anxious to settle the problem by peaceful means. However, instead of improving, the situation in Tibet began to worsen, and since then the question has come up several times before the General Assembly of the United Nations.
Our delegation participated in the discussion at the fourteenth session, in 1959, and although we abstained from voting we made it clear that, because of our close historical, cultural and religious ties with the Tibetans, we could not but be deeply moved and affected by what was happening in that region. I've hoped against hope that wiser counsel would prevail among the Chinese and that there would be an end to the sufferings of the people of Tibet.
However, the passage of time has completely belied our hopes. As the days pass, the situation becomes worse and cries out for the attention of all mankind. As we know, ever since Tibet came under the strangle-hold of China, the Tibetans have been subjected to a continuous and increasing ruthlessness which has few parallels in the annals of the world. In the name of introducing "democratic reforms" and of fighting a "counter-revolution", the Chinese have indulged in the worst kind of genocide and the suppression of a minority race.
To begin with, we in India were hopeful that, as contacts between the Chinese and the Tibetans under the changed set-up became closer and more intimate, a more harmonious relationship would emerge. In fact, in 1956, as a result of his long talks with Mr. Chou En-lai, the Chinese Premier, my late Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, felt confident that a mutually agreeable adjustment between the two peoples would be established. Even the Dalai Lama expressed a similar hope to our late Prime Minister, but, as subsequent events have proved, the Chinese never believed in living up to their assurances. They promised autonomy to Tibet and the safeguarding of its cultural and religious heritage and traditions but, as the International Commission of Jurists in its June 1959 report on Tibet has emphasized, they attempted, on the contrary: "to destroy the national, ethnical, racial and religious group of Tibetans as such by killing members of the group and by causing serious bodily and mental harm to members of the group."

Click here to read...

UN Speaks Out on Tibet
Radio Free Asia
2012-11-02
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay appears on a TV screen at a United Nation Human Rights Council meeting in Geneva, Feb. 27, 2012.
U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay called on China on Friday to address the grievances of Tibetans amid reports of new security clampdowns, travel restrictions, and disruption of communication links in Tibetan areas as Beijing prepares for a major leadership transition next week.
At the same time, the U.N. human rights chief urged an end to the Tibetan self-immolation protests challenging Chinese rule in which at least 62 Tibetans have set themselves ablaze since February 2009.
“I recognize Tibetans’ intense sense of frustration and despair which has led them to resort to such extreme means, but there are other ways to make those feelings clear,” she said.
In her statement, believed to be among the most forceful by a top U.N. official in directly addressing the situation in Tibet, Pillay pointed to “reports of detentions and disappearances, of excessive use of force against peaceful demonstrators, and curbs on the cultural rights of Tibetans.”
“I call on [China’s] government to respect the rights to peaceful assembly and expression, and to release all individuals detained for merely exercising these universal rights,” she said.
Cases cited by Pillay include the beating and imprisonment of a 17-year-old Tibetan girl who distributed flyers calling for Tibetan freedom and the return of exiled spiritual leader the Dalai Lama, along with other instances of Tibetans jailed for writing essays, making films, or sending information about events in Tibet to contacts outside the region.
Media access to Tibetan areas should be lifted, Pillay said, and “independent and impartial” monitors allowed to visit and report on the conditions they observe.
In addition, Pillay called on China to suspend the forced resettlement of Tibetan nomads and to review policies encouraging large-scale Han Chinese migration into ethnic Tibetan areas.
“Social stability in Tibet will never be achieved through heavy security measures and suppression of human rights,” Pillay said.
“Deep underlying issues need to be addressed."

Security clampdown
Meanwhile, Tibetan sources report that Chinese authorities have tightened restrictions on information flows and the movements of Tibetans during the lead-up to the Nov. 8 ruling Chinese Communist Party Congress in Beijing, at which a new group of national leaders will be chosen for the next ten years.
“Tibet has been virtually cut off from the rest of the world,” a Tibetan living in Sichuan province’s Kardze prefecture told RFA, speaking on condition of anonymity.
“It began a few days ago,” he said.
“Usually, local Tibetans communicate among themselves using [the texting service] WeChat, but even this is now entirely blocked, and Tibetans can no longer use it to send messages within China.”
“The purpose of the blackout is to prevent the spread of news concerning possible protests in Tibet during the 18th Party Congress,” a second Tibetan source in Kardze said, also on condition he not be named.
“New military posts have been set up in areas where they weren’t present before,” the source said, referring probably to units of China’s paramilitary People’s Armed Police.
“Whether this new security presence is permanent isn’t clear, but all major towns and cities in Tibetan-inhabited areas have seen a buildup.”
Separately, a Tibetan living in the Tibet Autonomous Region reported tightened controls on the movements of Tibetans traveling to large cities like Chamdo and the regional capital Lhasa, noting that travelers are now frequently stopped at police checkpoints and required to present government identification papers.
“These restrictions are due to the opening of the 18th Party Congress,” he said, adding that “monks and nuns are especially bearing the brunt of this heavy security clampdown.”
Reported by Norbu Damdul and Soepa Gyatso for RFA’s Tibetan service. Translated by Dorjee Damdul. Written in English with additional reporting by Richard Finney.