Observations of an expat: Rooftop war

Embed from Getty Images

The Chinese and the Indians are at it again. To be more precise the Chinese are at it. They are once again pushing at the disputed 2,100 mile Sino-Indian border.

This week 20 Indian soldiers died and tensions rose as Chinese soldiers attacked with sticks and stones. Tensions appear to have subsided – for now.

But why is a border high in the sparely-populated Himalayas of any interest to the rest of the world? For a start we are talking about the two most populous countries in the world. They are both nuclear powers. They have the largest and second largest conventional armies in the world.

There is also the problem that the headwaters of the strategic Indus River run through the disputed Ladakh Region.  The Chinese have become notorious for damming fast-moving Himalayan rivers for their hydroelectric power at the expense of downriver farmers and industrialists. Several southeast Asian nations will testify to the fact.

Ladakh also borders Tibet and has historic and cultural ties with the Buddhist country which is a constant thorn in Beijing’s side. Control of Ladakh would enable the Chinese to tighten their control over Lhasa. Pakistan could also be expected to exploit the situation to renew fighting in disputed Kashmir – now under Indian martial law.

China and India are world economic engines. A Sino-Indian War – especially in the midst of an economically disastrous pandemic – would join Brexit and American race wars in tipping the world into an even deeper economic abyss.

The Himalayan clash is also a worrying trend in Chinese diplomacy. Beijing has been traditionally viewed as taking the long, softly, softly catchee monkey with soft words and loads of dosh approach to foreign affairs. Since the pandemic that view appears to have shortened.

The Chinese have responded to tariffs and the Trump’s conspiracy theories about the “Chinese Virus” with their own even more outrageous and conspiracy theories about American involvement. They have clamped down on Hong Kong and recently rammed a Vietnamese fishing boat in the South China Sea.

Finally, there is the danger of American involvement. The Trump Administration has been forging a new anti-Chinese alliance with India, Vietnam, Australia and Japan. If the Chinese push too hard, Trump could feel the need to come to the aid of his new best friend – and fellow right-wing populist – Narendra Modi.

But back to the roof of the world. The roots of the Sino-Indian border dispute are set firmly in the British Raj. To be precise they are the result of the difficulty successive British surveyors had in mapping Himalayan peaks and valleys. The result was a botched job. The Indians were easy about it. They were owned by the British. The Chinese were distracted by the British-led carve-up of their empire to care too much.

It was not until Indian independence in 1948 and the Chinese Communist accession to power the following year that the border issue resurfaced. In 1950 the Chinese invaded and annexed Tibet and brought the Chinese border right up to the border of India. It finally boiled over into the 1962 Sino-Indian war which was fought on both sides of the long border; in the west in the Ladakh region and in the East the Indian-controlled protectorate of Sikkim. The Indians were humiliatingly defeated at both ends.

Since then there has been an armed Sino-Indian truce with periodic outbreaks of goodwill punctuated by the occasional skirmish. The Indians are painfully aware that the Chinese People’s Liberation Army is three times the size of the Indian military, so they have concentrated on consolidating  control by building airports and roads to what is called the Line of Actual Control (LAC) –  to avoid the more legalistic terms boundary or border.

When he assumed office, Indian Prime Minister Narendra declared that a settlement with China was his top foreign policy priority. He organised two summits with Xi Jinping, but no progress was made. China sees no long term advantage in compromise. It simply does not fit in with its plan to be the number one power in Asia.

* Tom Arms is foreign editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and author of “The Encyclopedia of the War” and the recently published “America Made in Britain". He has a weekly podcast, Transatlantic Riff.

Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in Op-eds.


  • John Marriott 19th Jun '20 - 8:55am

    @Tom Arms
    I read your pieces with interest, although, a bit like many of Jo Bourke’s offerings, many of the ‘facts’ can be gleaned from a quick glance at Wikipedia (if, of course, you know where to look). However, judging from the usual lack of responses (zero as at 8.45am) it would appear that most LDV contributors seem to display a certain amount of indifference to what you have to say. I know that feeling, as many of what I considered to be rather, by Lib Dem standards, provocative ‘illiberal’ remarks in some of my contributions tend to fall on deaf ears.

    Now, if you were prepared to wade into ‘the Coalition -Yes or No?‘ or have something to say on ‘statues – pull ‘em down or keep ‘em there?’ (forgive me if you already have), you might get a bigger response. I sometimes wonder whether many Lib Dems really care much about what is happening around the world, especially if it doesn’t fit the Liberal, egalitarian mould.

    So, keep trying. Here’s one LDV obsessive, who enjoys to read about other things!

  • The 1963 Sino-Pakistani agreement delimited the boundary between those two countries. This may be revised if there was any settlement of the Kashmir problem (unlikely)
    Disputed areas remain on the Sino-Indian border.

  • I certainly find this interesting. Part of the problem here is that we in the west have been continuously acquiescing to Chinese expansionism, for example failing to respond to the militarisation of disputed islands in the South China Sea or belligerence towards Taiwan and the bullying of countries or organisations that come anywhere close to recognising Taiwan (the recent WHO spat is all part of this). As China is a nuclear power we can’t go in all guns blazing, but appeasement isn’t the answer either.

  • Innocent Bystander 19th Jun '20 - 11:20am

    The British are to blame, yet again.
    Tell me please, where should the Raj have put the border considering that none of the locals, at the time, cared a light?

  • John Marriott 19th Jun '20 - 3:20pm

    I’m pleased to see that there are a few people in LDV land, who can get energised by the prospect of conflict between, let us not forget, two nuclear powers. Just think. Some people may have had a little chuckle at the news of Mao’s China and Nehru’s India having a go at each other back in 1962. They’re not laughing now. But, if they are, they had better watch out.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?


Recent Comments

  • Nonconformistradical
    @Peter Martin "Raising taxes generally will, at the moment, benefit for younger people who are struggling to pay increased mortgage costs too." How, if they a...
  • Peter Martin
    @ Steve, It is the lending process by commercial banks that creates what is often referred to as 97% of the money in circulation. It also the spending proces...
  • Peter Martin
    Raising taxes generally will, at the moment, benefit for younger people who are struggling to pay increased mortgage costs too. I admit it will be a hard sel...
  • Chris Perry
    P.S. Just by way of clarification. It is my belief that although people born in these islands might identify with their place of birth they are likely to descri...
  • Simon McGrath
    Have the Tories really 'underfunded ' the NHS. According to the Kings Fund , spending was £150.3bn in 2018/19 and £181.7bn in 2022/23 (all in real terms ). ...