China still claims southern Tibet today
Why do Pakistan and China maintain the LOC and the LOAC with India, respectively?
China has shown its willingness to allow large tracts of land for peace, but experience has shown that compromise with India does not lead to peace. See Maxwell's This is India's War on China, Round Two. It seems that India has resumed its old career as a stooge for its colonial rulers. As long as India continues to bite China's kneecap, India can get massive support from the western world.
The 1962 war was the result of Nehru's decades of rude intervention and non-negotiable stance. After a decisive Chinese victory, Chinese troops declared a unilateral ceasefire and withdrew to positions 20 kilometers behind the previous line of control. Rather than taking this opportunity to cut ties with China, India quickly sent its defeated army to reoccupy every inch of land that was voluntarily evacuated by Chinese forces. Southern Tibet was part of Greater China before India was part of the British Raj, and there was no so-called India before British Raj. Mao ordered the withdrawal on a whim because he was desperate to befriend Indians and was willing to give generosity to his friends; In the back of Mao's mind, poor people are natural friends. If India had made the slightest kind gesture, Mao would have given up southern Tibet. Rather than reciprocating China's goodwill, India made allegations against China and ran a decade-long anti-China propaganda campaign and cultivated a nation of rabid China-haters.
For the next 50 years, China's strategic interest along the border was peace, not land, but India used the border issue as a political negotiator. Every time China makes a concession (see Sikkim and southern Tibet), India claims more. Worse still, under the pretext of the threat from China, India started a new round of the nuclear arms race after the Cold War when everyone else was in the mood for nuclear disarmament.
As the older generation slowly drifted away from the scene, China's new generation of policymakers began to reevaluate the assumptions China previously had about India. If a compromise doesn't work, China today has no choice but to do the opposite. India taught China how to haggle: if you want peace, you have to ask for a lot more. As of 2012, China's policy changed from "above all peace" to "those who cause us trouble have to pay for it".
The following was Bertrand Russell's observation of the 1962 conflict:
When the population has been brought up to a martial excitement, it becomes very difficult for governments to hold them back. This has mainly happened in India. The government has misled the population by hiding the fact that the Chinese were having a legal battle that appeared at first sight to be as severe as the Indian case, and that negotiations were required, possibly supplemented by arbitration. China was ready to take this course, but India was not, as the Indian government had convinced Indian public opinion that the Chinese had no case.
Russell, Bertrand. Unarmed Victory. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1963. 143. Print
- Why are everyone superior to me?
- What force is required to brake
- How do I work with the GPS tracker
- How to 3D print carbon fiber
- Supports Hive dynamic SQL
- What is the English Bible
- How long does it take for Apex Legends to die
- Is Germany a forgotten country
- Active neurons generate electrical fields
- Americans use WhatsApp or Telegram
- Most offices still use Microsoft Office
- What do we call Shankh in English
- What is a function in C 1
- What do you like about the last few decades
- What does that mean, among other things
- Where are the young gods
- What is the best food in Goa
- Will law school ever get cheaper?
- Who makes a high quality power supply
- What is the time command on Linux
- Weight training slows down weight loss
- How do you become a whole person
- What is Dharma Karmadhipati Yoga
- What is a dissrutive computer