On October 4, 2019, the Munk School of Global Affairs invited Dr. Bérénice Guyot-Réchard, a professor of Twentieth-Century International History at King’s College London, to present a lecture entitled “The Fear of Being Compared: India, China, and the Himalayas.” The lecture explored the role the Himalayan mountain range has played in shaping Sino-Indian relations between 1910 and 1962. The lecture was chaired by Dr. Takashi Fujitani, the director of the Dr. David Chu Program in Asia-Pacific Studies, and coordinated by Dr. Christoph Emmrich, the Director of the Centre for Asian Studies. This event was sponsored by the Asian Institute and the Centre for South Asian Politics and co-sponsored by the Dr. David Chu Program in Asia Pacific Studies.
Dr. Guyot-Réchard is a specialist in the history and politics of modern South Asia and the Indian Ocean. Her research interests include these regions’ post-colonial experiences; issues related to frontiers, borders, and borderlands; and state-building strategies. Her first book “Shadow States: India China and the Eastern Himalayas,” published in 2016, explores the role the Himalayan mountain range has played in shaping Sino-Indian relations between 1910-1962. The lecture given at Munk this October was also on this topic.
Dr. Guyot-Réchard began the lecture by addressing the fact that the Himalayan mountain range has historically and contemporarily been the focal point for border disputes between China and India. “The relationship between China and India has been tense for the last 70 years—tense to the point where in 1962 they went to war with one another. And we still regularly witness tensions and military standoffs in the Himalayas.”
She said that tensions tended to be concentrated on the Himalayan mountain range due to geopolitics. “China and India have long engaged in power struggles for influence over Tibet, Southern Asia, Inner Asia, and the Indian Ocean.” The bilateral situation of the Himalayan mountain range causes it to be “a place where the nations’ tensions boil over, a place where one can see visual manifestations of Sino-Indian interactions.”
She then gave one such example: in the 1950s, a man from Dzäyul (a region on the Himalayas under Chinese rule) travelled to a village under Indian rule. While in the Indian-ruled village, he encountered two Indian government officials from a touring party distributing goods and providing medical care to the locals. The man asked the officials for malaria treatment, and although he did not have any signs of having the disease, the officials gave him the treatment. Dr. Guyot-Réchard explained that they did this in order to extrapolate information about how the Chinese government had been administering Dzäyul.
The man explained that the Chinese government had also been providing free goods and services, and taxing less than the previous Dalai Lama administration; but that ultimately they were not getting as many free things as the people on the Indian side of the border. One of the Indian officials later wrote back to his superior, saying that he believed the malaria treatment would be a good form of pro-India propaganda.
“This small interaction reveals a lot about the nature of Sino-Indian relations,” Dr. Guyot-Réchard said. “It tells us that Chinese and Indian expansion was occurring in parallel within the region, and that the state formation processes of the two nations was closely observed and reacted to by government officials and the locals.”
Another historical instance that exemplified the importance of the Himalayas in the development of Sino-Indian relations was the Sino-Indian War of 1962. Dr. Guyot-Réchard stated that this war was the result of a military security dilemma: both countries had advanced their troops towards the border, to the point where one party attacked. In this case, China attacked first by invading an area in the Eastern Himalayas. The conflict ended swiftly with the defeat of India.
The Indian government subsequently evacuated the region, and the Chinese troops occupied the area for three months. While occupation is usually associated with militarization and brutality, the Chinese military took the opposite approach. “They took advantage of this time to prove that China was a superior state that could provide better for the border people.” During the occupation, the Chinese had provided entertainment and medical treatment; and they had constructed a road that linked that area to the border without using any local labour. Their intention was to leave a message with the locals: “They wanted to present to the border people that they were benevolent, and that they would be happy to come back should the border people want to get rid of Indian administration,” she said.
While this conflict was triggered by a military security dilemma, Dr. Guyot-Réchard emphasized that the oldest and most profound security dilemma between the nations has always been “the battle for the hearts and minds of the border people.” The Chinese and Indian governments are continuously vying to win their hearts and minds because it is by this means, she claims, that “the nations can gain the loyalty of the people and ultimately the legitimacy of rulership.”
Paulina Chan is a fourth-year student majoring in Political Science and East Asian Studies. She is pleased to be an Event Reporter for the East Asia division of Synergy: The Journal of Contemporary Asian Studies this year. Her main academic interests include East Asian history, development, domestic politics, and international relations.
Leave a Reply