60 Years After the Sino-Indian War
The DiplomatIn the eastern Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh abutting China lies a Tibetan Buddhist monastery in Tawang. Dai Bingguo, who served as Beijing’s Special Representative for border talks with India between 2003 and 2013, wrote in an article in 2017 that “the major reason the boundary question persists is that China’s reasonable requests have not been met.” The Chinese line has hardened, and its state media now talks of “Zangnan” – literally meaning “southern Tibet” – best defined as all of Arunachal. The document, the Defense Ministry’s monthly activity report, said under the heading “Chinese aggression on LAC” – referring to the Line of Actual Control – that “the situation in Eastern Ladakh arising from unilateral aggression by China continues to be sensitive and requiring close monitoring and prompt action based on evolving situation.” It added, “Chinese aggression has been increasing along the LAC and more particularly in Galwan Valley since 5th May, 2020. After the disengagement at PP15, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, when asked if the latest round of disengagement could lead to a restoration of the April 2020 status quo, said, “I’d like to state that the status quo of April 2020 you mentioned was created by India’s illegal crossing of the LAC. China will by no means accept that… We don’t accept the so-called status quo created by India’s illegal crossing of the LAC.” The status quo has been altered dramatically since April 2020 by both sides, but particularly by China with its massive construction of military and dual-use infrastructure in the area.