Bilateral
relations between India and China have been on the upswing
for quite some time. This is due to the fact that we have
put some of the contentious issues on the back stage. So to
say India has preferred to keep silence over claims of China
on some parts of the its territory. Recently Tibetans have
launched agitation against China for their various demands
including independence. A number of people have also been
killed in retaliatory action by China. The international community
has urged China to observe restraint and to be sympathetic
to the demands of the Tibetans. India too has adopted a cautious
approach as it believes in a peaceful resolution of the issue.
The religious head of the Tibetans, Dalai Lama, who has his
headq uarters at Dharmashala, India, has also urged restraint
on the part of Tibetans and to not to resort to violence to
achieve their demands. Recently Dalai Lama had praised India
for giving refuge to the people of Tibet and its humane approach
towards their problems. However, the external affairs minister,
Pranab Mukherjee, in clear terms, said that Dalai Lama was
free to live in India as a guest but should not issue statements
which may hurt ties between India and China. Even during the
period of Pt Jawaharlal Nehru it had been made clear that
Dalai Lama would live a spiritual and religious life in India
and the succeeding governments after Nehru too followed this
policy. However, a question arises if the Dalai will not speak
about the problems of Tibetans then of whom? In this context
the statement of the external affairs minister is beyond understanding.
Has India's China policy been the same in the past too? Right
from the beginning, India has taken Tibet as an autonomous
region of China. Hence it should also believe that its autonomous
nature should not be undermined. India is a signatory to the
non-aligned movement and its policy should not be to shut
the mouth of a person who takes refuge in its land.
|
Print This Page
Terms
and Conditions