Resolve Tibet Act: An Opportune Time To Revisit India’s Tibet Policy

By Anuraag Khaund

Tibet once again came to the fore-front of news headlines past few days because of two momentous actions by US and India. On 12 June, the US House of Representatives passed the Promoting a Resolution to the Tibet- China Act  (also known as the Resolve Tibet Act) which for the first time clearly stated the Washington’s position on Tibet not constituting ‘a part of China since ancient times’. The Act also called for the dispute between Tibet and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to be ‘resolved in accordance with international law, including the UN Charter, by peaceful means, through dialogue, without pre-conditions’ while enhancing bipartisan US support to the Tibetan issue. The above Act can be termed historic in the sense that the wording clearly posits Tibet and PRC as two separate entities locked in a long-standing dispute of international dispute (reference to international law) instead of the former being a part of the latter’s territory and hence the dispute being ‘internal.’ Also noteworthy is the fact that the Act stipulates the US government to counter Beijing’s disinformation of Chinese historical claims over the Tibetan plateau including not just the current Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) but also the provinces of Sichuan, Qinghai, Gansu and Yunnan.    

In India, the new Modi 3.0 government has given the green signal to rename 30 places in Tibet in a tit-for-tat move aimed at Chinese action of renaming places in Arunachal Pradesh, which Beijing refers to as ‘Zagnan’ or Southern Tibet on March 2024. This, and other events such as Taiwan President Lai Ching- te’s congratulatory message to PM Modi and the latter’s reciprocation of the same with wishes of closer New Delhi- Taipei ties have led to the speculation that Sino- Indian ties are bound to remain rocky like in the previous years since 2020. Moreover, Xi Jinping’s act of not personally congratulating the new Indian PM on his assumption of office and the blatant Chinese pessimism on social media regarding the new government can be seen as an indication of the continuation of the current situation described as ‘armed coexistence’.

Both the above instances involving India and US, two prominent democracies and global players have resulted in the re-emergence of the question of Tibet which have often remained on the backburner in an attempt not to stir up trouble with China. For India, the passage of the Resolve Tibet Act and the US clarity of position on Tibet is an opportune time to re-visit and re-examine its own Tibet policy which is still weighed down by history.

Criticism of India’s policy towards Tibet can be traced back to Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel’s prescient letter in 1950 about nefarious Chinese designs on Tibet and its negative implications upon the security of then newly independent India. His premonitions were proved true by the 1962 war despite Nehru’s acknowledgment of Chinese control over Tibet under the Panchsheel or the Five Principles of Peaceful Co- existence in 1954. Since then, over the years, corresponding to ebb and flow in Sino- Indian ties, there have been calls to revisit the over-cautious Indian approach to respecting Chinese sensibilities with no substantive reciprocation from the other side. This was reflected in the comments made by the Indian Parliamentary Committee on External Affairs in 2017 which stated that while New Delhi ‘is overly cautious with China about China’s sensitivities while dealing with Taiwan and Tibet, China does not exhibit the same deference while dealing with India’s sovereignty concerns, be it Arunachal Pradesh or that of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir’. Hence, the Committee called for adopting a ‘flexible approach’ in dealing with Beijing which include Taiwan. And should include Tibet as well.

Calls for revision of India’s Tibet strategy have become stronger in the backdrop of the continuing military standoff in Ladakh since 2020. This was reflected in action such as the PM’s conveying birthday wishes to the 14^th Dalai Lama and the attendance of then Sikyong (President) of the Tibetan Government in Exile (TGIE) Dr Lobsang Sangay during Modi’s first swearing ceremony in 2014. The re-naming of places in Tibet mentioned above has led to the opinion that the latter action is ‘tantamount to India re-opening the Tibetan question’. And it was about time that the Tibetan question be brought up for discussion and recalibrated in tune with India’s changing geopolitical and strategic equation with China. While the above tit- for-tat renaming is a good start, yet as scholar Claude Arpi opines New Delhi will have to be more proactive in formulating a new comprehensive strategy vis-à-vis Tibet.

A first step, as mentioned earlier, is the re-discovery and highlighting of the age old historical links between Tibet and India especially the Indian imprint in Tibetan culture, religion, medicine and language. Like in the renaming initiative, meticulous research must be directed towards the links between Tibetan and Sanskrit languages, Buddhist Gurus and monks from Indian subcontinent who preached in Tibet, and the cross-cultural exchange between Tibetan Vajrayana Buddhism and Hindu Tantric tradition visible in deities such as Palden Lhamo (similar features with Hindu Goddess Kali). To this end, the Government of India should provide active support and funds to institutions such as the Library of Tibetan Works and Archives, Norbulingka Institute, Men-Tsee-Khang (Tibetan traditional medicine) and the Tibet Museum in Dharamshala, Himachal Pradesh. The highlighting of the above linkages would put a strong dent to Chinese claims of control over Tibet since time immemorial. In this regard, New Delhi could also cooperate with the US as countering Chinese disinformation constitutes one of the objects of the Resolve Tibet Act.

The Sino- Indian rivalry over Buddhism constitutes another crucial area tied to New Delhi’s Tibet policy. China has made significant inroads into the world of Buddhism by increasing its influence in platforms such as World Fellowship of Buddhists, the International Council of Day of Vesak (ICDV) as well as promoting the development of Buddhist sites such as Lumbini in Nepal− the birthplace of Gautama Buddha. Such increasing influence over the Buddhist world is utilised by Beijing to push the narrative of China, rather than India, being the historical centre of Buddhism while discrediting the Dalai Lama using rival sects as proxies. In the near future, the above influence could also be used to prop up support and legitimacy for the Chinese appointed 15^th Dalai Lama after the passing away of the current one. Hence, India needs to urgently step up its game in the battle for influence by actively supporting bodies such as the International Buddhist Confederation (IBC) under the Union Ministry of Culture and organising the Global Buddhist Summit (GBS) annually. The recent inauguration of the Nalanda University in Rajgir, Bihar on 19 June near the site of the historic ancient seat of Buddhism  34 years after the idea was first deliberated in Parliament in 2010, is a welcome move which arrived late but nonetheless would bolster New Delhi’s soft power capabilities given it is utilised properly.

The most important pillar buttressing the Indian link with Buddhism and Tibet is the 14^th Dalai Lama himself who on many occasions have underlined the umbilical connection between India (Guru/ Mentor) and Tibet (Chela/ Disciple). Moreover, the proclamations of the Dalai Lama himself regarding his re-incarnation such as stressing his exclusive right to choose his own way of re-birth/ re-incarnation and his (legitimate) successor hailing from a free country (possibly India) puts New Delhi in an advantageous position vis- a vis China. Hence, India should strongly back the appointed successor or any reincarnation born on Indian soil while also actively supporting and coordinating with the Gaden Phodrang Foundation− the body deputed by His Holiness with the responsibility to recognize the latter’s reincarnation. In this regard, Washington’s support could also be sought within the  Tibetan Policy and Support Act (TPSA) 2020 which among other things, clearly stipulates the Tibetan Buddhist communities’ sole right to appoint the 15^th Dalai Lama without external (Chinese) influence. At the same time, Buddhist countries such as Japan and Vietnam to extend support to any future India born reincarnation− countries having strained ties with China currently. The 15^th Dalai Lama born and raised in India and receiving the support of Buddhist population worldwide would be an asset to New Delhi in maintaining and consolidating its position among the Tibetan communities in exile all over the world and in the leadership of Buddhism over China.

As a response to the mention of Kashmir in joint China- Pakistan statements, India should release an official statement supporting the Resolve Tibet Act and especially its emphasis on the resolution of the dispute between the two parties through dialogue. At the same time, both New Delhi and Washington should include Tibet and the Dalai Lama during summit level and high-level bilateral talks and release joint statements on the same thereby highlighting the disputed nature of Chinese occupation of the Tibetan plateau. Similar statements could also be generated bilaterally as well as multilaterally with countries like Japan and Vietnam since the Act also stipulates the US ‘to coordinate with other countries…. towards the goal of a negotiated agreement on Tibet.’  

The  recent visit of a US high level delegation to India whose itinerary includes a meeting with the Dalai Lama in Dharamshala is a step which should be made frequent and actively emulated by high ranking Indian ministers having audiences with the Tibetan leader. Important commemorations of Tibetan history such as Tibetan Independence Day (13 February) and Uprising Day (March 10) should include high level Indo- US participation as well as promotion of the events brushed under the carpet by Chinese narrative. Moreover, both New Delhi and Washington should bring up the gross human rights violations happening in Tibet on UN and other related forums. The UN’s focus should be brought upon the Tibetan self immolations and escaped political activists seeking asylum in India and elsewhere including allowing the latter to present testimonies in international fora. These would dent Chinese claims of peace and development in Tibet while also countering Beijing’s unnecessary meddling with Kashmir at the UN.  

 Finally, New Delhi should synergise its increasing ties with Taiwan with its Tibet policy. Despite the historical uneasiness between the both, India could devote efforts at bringing them closer and even support TGIE’s efforts to re-establish the Taiwanese parliamentary group for Tibet in the Legislative Yuan (Taiwanese parliament). In addition, Taiwan’s Buddhist connection could lead Taipei to support the Dalai Lama’s chosen re-incarnation candidate. In this, the US could be roped in given the latter’s status as the most important ally of Taiwan.

Mao Tse Dong in 1950 had justified Tibet’s annexation in terms of the latter being the ‘palm’ to ‘five fingers’ (Nepal, Bhutan, Sikkim, Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh). It is time India weakened the iron grip over the palm for the sake of the fingers crucial to our security and integrity.

• Anuraag Khaund is pursuing PhD in International Politics (IP), School of International Studies (SIS), Central University of Gujarat (CUG).

Follow this link to join our WhatsApp group: Join Now

MONTHLY	Rs 100
YEARLY	Rs 1000
LIFETIME	Rs 10000

CLICK FOR DETAILS