PART I
Question: Has Vajpayee given away too much to China in return for too little?
Answer: The visit of Prime Minister Vajpayee to China was extremely useful. It is after a decade that an Indian Prime Minister has been able to visit China. The last high-level visit from China was in 1997 when President Jiang Zemin had come over and I was the Foreign Minister in the then Deve Gowda government.
It was during that visit that we were able to work out how to consolidate and further the ‘peace and tranquility’ agreement at the border. We were to work the type and concentration of forces at the border, the type of arms that will be on either side, reduce the chances for an eyeball-to-eyeball situation etc.
As a result, both India and China were able to thin the concentration of forces at the respective borders. It was step forward which I think has been further consolidated by the visit of the Indian Prime Minister
Comment posted By SUBRATA DE on 6/30/03 Vajpayee is not a shrewd negotiator – he failed in getting anything from the US leading to Iraq war when nearly all other nations bargained and got massive concessions. His visit and statements on Tibet has not got any Chinese reciprocation on Sikkim !
Answer from I K Gujral: He has been criticised for allegedly going overboard with the US. But in my opinion the reality is that the US is the sole power in the world. I can claim credit for setting the initial tone for the relations with America when I met President Clinton in 1997. I had tried to oprerate a new chapter in our relations with the US and that has been sustained and consolidated by the Vajpayee-government.
Comment posted By OM on 6/30/03 What Vajpayee did was a class act of gamesmanship. Dalai Lama had started talking on Tibet, to unify with China. With this background, it would have been worthless in India having high stance with Tibet issue. Moreover, by doing so, India does not loose Tibet. For it was never India’s. In fact all these years, India unnecessarly had a difference of opinion with China on a matter it had no gain. Hence this act of Indian PM would not go unrecognized in the long run.
Answer by I K Gujral Please understand that Tibet has never been a part of India. The ‘suzerainty’ of China over Tibet has been there for centuries. I have an official statement by Dalai Lama’s representative in New Delhi who has clarified in so many words that there has been “no departure” from the earlier Indian stance during the Prime mInister’s trip to China.
India has always recognised Tibet as an autonomous region of China. Therefore, those who say that India has compromised Tibet’s position during the Prime mInister’s visit are clearly over-reacting.
Comment posted By SRIKANTH PULIPAKA on 6/30/03 What I feel is. Instead of trading with Sikkim ( which is in all respects part of India ). PM should have asked for China-occupied Kashmir. Which would have seriously affected Pak in a great way and we would have got our land back in a peaceful way. In return would have had control over the old Silk route.
Answer from I K GujralIn 1997, when I was the foreign minister China was agreeable to opening the trade route through Sikkim, but they made a condition that Kalimpong, which is in West Bengal, would be staging station. That is that traders and goods would come through Sikkim and be traded at Kalimpong. This was not acceptable to us.
In that sense the fact that China has agreed to open the trade route through Nathu La in Sikkim is a definite step forward. It is big step because China usually takes any step forward in ultra slow-motion. We should not expect any dramatic results.
Comment posted By KANTI on 6/30/03Vajpayee does not know what is he doing. He is a total failure in all subjects. In the interest of country He should resign. It looks like he dragging himself just to win Nobel Peace Prize.
Answer by I K Gujral Vajpayee has done reasonably well. After all. Foreign Policy is not a package of visual thinking. It has to be embedded in solid realities and is to a certain extent the art of the possible. It is turning grey’s into whites and black into greys. These things do not happen overnight.
He has been criticised for allegedly going overboard with the US. But the in my opinion the reality is that the US is the sole power in the world. I can claim credit for setting the initial tone for the relations with America when I met President Clinton in 1997. I had tried to open a new chapter in our relation with the US and that has been sustained and consolidated by the Vajpayee-government.
Comment posted By GEORGE W on 6/30/03 Vajpayee desperately wants to be known as MAN OF PEACE.More than Tibet J&K is THE MOST pressing problem in need of peace.So what CONCESSIONS will he give Pak ? Full J&K ? In return win a pat from Mush?
Answer by I K GujralNo need to be emotional. If he wants to be known as a man of peace there is no harm in that. At the same time , I do not agree with your proposition about Kashmir.
Posted By NUPUR on 6/30/03 No i don’t think that Vajpayee has given away too much for too little cause India and China together make up almost one-third of the world’s population so it is only fair that India should make peace with its neighbours for improving our chances of survival.
Comment posted By PARAMESWARAN on 6/30/03 We have accepted explicitly and in writing that Tibet is a part of china. China has signed only a border agreement and has further clarified that this is no recognition – implied or explicit – that sikkim is part of india. is it a good bargain. what was the need to put in writing about Tibet now, if it was already our known and expressed stand.
Answer by I K Gujral Tibet has never been part of India nad has been known as an autonomous region of China for centuries.
Comment posted By ANAND on 6/30/03Though not many people realize it. The status of Tibet had never been disputed. Since Jawaharlal Nehru India has recognised Tibet as part of China. India has just reiterated it. And in turn, we have got implicit recongnition of Indias rule in Sikkim. Infact we have not given away anything
Answer by I K Gujral Quite correct.
Comment posted By VIJAY SHAH on 6/30/03 Vajpayee should do everyhting that makes sense under the circumstances ….I have full faith in his abilities. Recognising Tibet for China is wise. Will see if China reciprocates on Arunachal Pradesh and Sikkim.
Answer by I K Gujral I broadly agree with your statement.
Comment posted By JAYAPRAKASH on 6/30/03 It appears that all the great leaders of India are great in only one thing, i.e. compromising our nation, selling-out our friends like the Tibetans and sucking up to the rogues who make like difficult for us – communists, and imperialists.
Answer by I K Gujral Please understand that Tibet has never been a part of India. The ‘suzerainty’ of China over Tibet has been there for centuries. I have an official statement by Dalai Lama’s representative in New Delhi who has clarified in so many words that there has been “no departure” from the earlier Indian stance during the Prime mInister’s trip to China. India has always recognised Tibet as an autonomous region of China. Therefore, those who say that India has compromised Tibet’s position durin the Prime mInister’s visit are clearly over-reacting
PART II
Comment posted By VIPUL on 6/30/03 Vajpayee has been given away too much to china in return for too little
Answer by I K Gujral: As I said earlier Tibet has been a autonomous region of China since centuries and has never been part of India and there has been no change in the policy of the Indian governments on this, Even the Dalai Lama has clarified this recently.
Comment posted By MADHU on 6/30/03 China cannot really be friends of any country. Do they now want to break up with pakistan, because they can’t be on two sides when war broke out between two countries which is inevitable, Infact Pakistan is maintaining two kinds goverments military and terrorist one that blabbers and other are animals killing the people faking under god’s name.
Answer by I K Gujral: I do not think there will be any qualitative shift in Sin-Pak relations because of Prime Minister’s visit to China. There’s have been close allies for may years now and I do not think there is going to be any dilution in the Sino-Pak nexus in the near future.
Comments posted By AJAY BALI on 6/29/03 I do not think that Mr Vajpayee has given too uch to China . You can not have enemies on all our borders . Even countries like USA regards Tibet as part of China. I personally think that India should woo China away from Pakistan and I am of the opinion that India should settle its border dispute with China on the basis of Line of actual control as International border with China and then May be we can tell Pakistan to do the same
Answer by I K Gujral I agree.
Comment posted By RAMTANU MAITRA on 6/29/03 There is no reason to think Vajpayee gave away too much. The issue, as far as I am concerned, is not the proverbial give and take. What was at stake is whether India and China can, at the highest level, start thinking of taking reponsibility for the region they are in. Asia security, utilization of each other’s strength in economic and technological areas and set the example for others in the region how to resolve the bilateral disputes.
Answer by I K Gujral I think what your are saying is extremely sensioble and sagacious.
Comment posted By PPS AHLUWALIA on 6/29/03 Sir,the overall result is not that bad. China is in a better position to dictate since Chinese after, grabbing Ind land of over 35000Km were never to lose in any dialogue and every process of boundaries was being shelved from 1962 to date. Our PM has broken the prolonged stalemate. It is better to move forward instead of clinging with the ghosts of our traumatic past. Tibetans could take care of Tibet and are losing nothing in this declaration.
Answer by I K Gujral There is no point in being emotional. We have to ne hard-headed, safeguard our interests and at the same time take the relation with China forward. The question of whether we can trust or not trust China does not arise. After all. We are not getting our daughter married off to china. China cannot be ignored as it is one of the largest economies in world and it is also one of the big powers in Asia and we have to learn to live with them. Foreign policies can never be emotion based.
Comment posted By MALINI on 6/29/03 Love thy neighbour and don’t get caught. I think we should compromise sometimes due to certain external pressure.Anyway time will tell!
Answer by I K Gujral It was during that visit that we were able to work out how to consolidate and further the ‘peace and tranquility’ agreement at the border. We were to work the type and concentration of forces at the border, the type of arms that will be on either side, reduce the chances for an eyeball-to-eyeball situation etc. As a result, both India and China were able to thin the concentration of forces at the respective borders. It was step forward which I think has been further consolidated by the visit of the Indian Prime Minister.
Comment posted By PARMESHWAR COOMAR on 6/29/03 How about recognition of Sikkim and Ladakh and Leh as integral part of India? When is China going to give up its India baiting using Pakistan? India should learn how to negotiate from position of strength. Cowardice will only get something of a re-enactment of 1962 events with China. India should reconsider its stand on TIBET being part of China.
Answer by I K Gujral I think that opening of trade routes in Sikkim’s Nathu La is a definite movement forward. Please understand that Tibet has never been a part of India. The ‘suzerainty’ of China over Tibet has been there for centuries.
Comment posted By KANTHARAO KOTAMRAJU on 6/29/03 India should first get stronger economically and politically in global scene(eg. getting a permanent seat UN Security council) in a equal footing like China. Then it can take up with China in any manner (aggressively or peacefully) for regaining our lost land (?). In the meantime, we should continue to be friendly with all the neighbours without sacrificing our dignity and human values (like protecting the Tibetan refugees).
Answer by I K Gujral India should be develeoping economically and politically globally irrespective of our position on China.
Comment posted By VIVEK-ANANDAN on 6/29/03 The BJP’s true strength in dealing with powerful states have been exposed. These people are Good at only talking great about themselves and stronly critical of others. Without getting any concessin to India in terms of territory in Sikkim or in Kashmir area donated by Pakistan to China – The BJP Stongman has given away in too much in Tibet.
Answer by I K Gujral As I said earlier there is no pint in being emotional. We have to be hard-headed, safeguard our interests and at the same time take the relation with China forward. The question of whether we can trust or not trust China does not arise. After all. We are not getting our daughter married off to china. China cannot be ignored as it is one of the largest economies in world and it is also one of the big powers in Asia and we have to learn to live with them. Foreign policies can never be emotion based or based on negative impulses.
Comment posted By KRSHNAN on 6/29/03 No doubt it is a sell out. but why now? what was the hurry to deal with China now? Is it that the USA wants to finish off the indo-pak issue before this govt goes in the next election? They must see this govt as the weakest in the near past and the near future, and so they see this as the opportunity to twist the arms of india, and put india in its place?
Answer by I K Gujral I do not agree. The opening of the trade route through Nathu La in sikkim is a definite forward movement. And, India has not changed its stance on Tibet, as clarified by the representative of the Dalai Lama.
