Rethink India, China border peace

With India and China agreeing on an “expeditious disengagement” of troops at Doklam, the 70-day long military stand-off has ended, for now. Bilateral tensions were escalating dangerously since mid-July, with Indian and Chinese troops locked in an eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation at the India-Bhutan-China trijunction at Doklam. Adding fuel to the fire was China’s bellicose rhetoric. An outbreak of hostilities seemed imminent. Fortunately, saner heads have prevailed. A quiet diplomatic process bore fruit, resulting in the two sides agreeing to pull back their troops. While China has “suspended” the road-building activity in Doklam, which set off the tensions in the first place, it has not come around to accepting India’s position on the border in the Sikkim area. Beijing has said it will continue to “uphold sovereignty” and would review its road plan, taking into account factors such as weather and terrain. It agreed to disengage now only because it is hosting the BRICS summit next week and is keen to have India participate in it and make it a success. Additionally, the 19th Congress of the Chinese Communist Party is coming up in October.

In the face of Chinese provocations, India did well to stand its ground. Delhi has sent out a strong message to Beijing that it will not buckle under Chinese bullying. Additionally, India acted maturely by not getting into a mud-slanging match with the Chinese. The restraint was commendable. It has also done well to avoid gloating over the disengagement. But while the de-escalation will prompt Delhi to heave a sigh of relief, India cannot lower its guard. Also, the Narendra Modi government may be tempted to see the end of the Doklam crisis as a vindication that its muscular approach to its neighbours, including China, works. That would be a foolhardy reading of the crisis and its end. By agreeing to disengage troops, Beijing and Delhi have only agreed to disagree for now.

The Doklam crisis should serve as a wake-up call to Delhi and Beijing. Hitherto, they patted themselves on the back for the “peace and tranquillity” they had maintained along their disputed border. The Doklam crisis indicates that this ‘calm’ was ephemeral; at the first sign of trouble, a crisis erupted and escalated. What happened to the CBMs put in place and hotlines established to prevent such escalation? The Special Representatives framework for settling border disputes has fallen short, as China contends that it does not cover the Sikkim sector dispute. Yet, the lesson from Doklam for both is that war is not an option, dialogue and diplomacy are the only way forward. It is time the two sides explored new institutional mechanisms to keep the peace.