At a funeral last week in the mountains of northern India, one of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s top aides paid respect to a Tibetan soldier killed on the front lines of deadly clashes with China.
Surrounded by troops waving the flags of India and Tibet, Ram Madhav laid a wreath before the coffin during a ceremony that gave the deceased man full military honors.
In a now-deleted tweet, the national general secretary of Modi’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) said that he hoped the soldier’s death would lead to peace along the “Indo-Tibetan border.”
Illustration: Kevin Sheu
The rare recognition of a secretive Indian military unit with Tibetan soldiers by itself threatened to escalate a border dispute that has killed dozens since May and tanked economic ties between the world’s most-populous nations. Even more significant was the suggestion that India questioned China’s sovereignty over Tibet — a red line for Beijing, which sees separatism as a cause also worth fighting for in Taiwan, as well as Xinjiang and Hong Kong.
“The Indians are sending a message — a very strong message, which they probably have not sent for decades,” said Robbie Barnett, who headed Columbia University’s Modern Tibetan Studies Program until 2018 and has written about the region since the 1980s. “The involvement of exiled Tibetans and the use of exiled Tibetan icons, images and flags, is hugely significant for China’s interpretation.”
While India and China’s foreign ministers agreed on the need for restraint during a meeting in Moscow last week, tensions along the border remain higher than at any point since hostilities resumed. Both sides continue to ramp up forces in the disputed area, which is key to controlling vital Himalayan mountain passes, with warning shots fired this month along the Line of Actual Control for the first time in more than four decades.
In the past few weeks China moved fighter planes and heavy bombers to the Indian frontier from the Central Theater Command, Beijing’s strategic reserve, which was not done even when the two sides went to war in 1962, according to Indian defense officials, who asked not to be identified due to rules for speaking with the media.
The Chinese Ministry of Defense did not reply to faxed questions.
While neither country has an incentive to go to war, the increasing intensity and persistence of friction might cause them to stumble into one, according to Vipin Narang, an associate professor of political science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Eurasia Group last week raised the probability that boundary skirmishes might lead to a more sustained military conflict to 15 percent.
“An advertent or inadvertent incident at a local flash point could now really fuel a broader conflict that neither government wants,” said Narang, who wrote a book about the deterrence strategies of regional nuclear powers.
Tibet, an area roughly the size of South Africa that stretches across the Himalayas, has been a point of contention in India’s relations with China ever since the Dalai Lama fled to the South Asian nation after a failed uprising in 1959. He set up a government-in-exile in the northern Indian town of Dharamsala, much to Beijing’s displeasure.
India only recognized Tibet as part of China in 2003.
India first established the military unit of Tibetan refugees, known as the Special Frontier Force (SFF), just after the 1962 India-China war to carry out covert operations behind Chinese lines, according to Jayadeva Ranade, a member of the National Security Council Advisory Board.
Akin to the special forces in the US, every member is trained as a para-commando and operates undercover in conjunction with the Indian military.
“The recognition is a clear message to China that your countrymen are fighting alongside us,” said Ranade, who heads the Centre of China Analysis and Strategy, a research group in New Delhi. “I don’t remember this force being acknowledged like this earlier.”
The Special Frontier Force participated in a nighttime raid last month to capture strategic high ground and remain on the front lines, according to the Indian defense officials.
Still, India and China are seeking to downplay the significance of the Tibetan soldiers.
Indian Army spokesperson Colonel Aman Anand declined to respond to questions about the unit, but said that the military was committed to maintaining peace and tranquility while also protecting national integrity and sovereignty at all costs.
The Indian Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not reply to a request seeking a comment.
Beijing has downplayed reports of the Tibetans, with Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Wang Wenbin (汪文斌) telling reporters on Monday to ask India about the issue.
“China’s position is clear,” he said. “We firmly oppose any country facilitating through any means the ‘Tibetan independence’ forces’ separatist activities.”
While the government has avoided inflaming the situation, China’s state-owned media have released footage over the past week of live-fire military exercises in Tibet involving tanks, fighter jets and even drones that could bring food to soldiers during the long winter expected to start soon.
The coffin of Nyima Tenzin, the Tibetan soldier who died, was draped with the flags of India and Tibet.
Madhav understood the significance: He wrote a book released in 2014 about the conflict called Uneasy Neighbours: India and China After 50 years of the War.
Madhav did not immediately reply to a request for comment on why he deleted his tweet.
Even though the Indian government has not officially acknowledged the Tibetan forces, Tenzin’s public funeral and the attendance by Madhav has roused support for the unit with the Tibetan exile community, according to Gonpo Dhundup, president of the Tibetan Youth Congress, a body that has more 30,000 members and is fighting for the region’s freedom.
“I strongly feel that younger generation will join the SFF in larger numbers,” Dhundup said by phone from McLeod Ganj outside Dharamshala. “The acknowledgment, no matter how brief, has sent out a message that our contribution will be recognized.”
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with