Abstract
Discussions of the boundary dispute often put a somewhat exaggerated emphasis on the Indian predicament of being forced to maintain frontiers inherited from British imperialism. Most of the new countries were faced with similar circumstances and took it as a matter of course that their administration should cover the entire territory left by their colonial masters. Moreover, Nehru himself has pointed out that the borders of China also were the result of prolonged and violent conquest.1 Yet it has taken India many years to shed her apologetic attitude. Emotional and imprecise slogans condemning colonialism as “permanent aggression” had produced a false impression of a dilemma concerning the legitimacy of the territorial legacy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
In Rajya Sabha on Sept. 10, 1959. Prime Minister on Sino-Indian relations, Vol. I, p. 146.
Rajya Sabha, Official Report, XXVII, No. 13 (Dec. 9, 1959) col. 1984–5.
Panikkar, K. M., In two Chinas, p. 175. Examination of the Rajya Sabha report does not warrant the conclusion that Nehru admitted having expected Chinese demands for further concessions in exchange for recognition of the McMahon Line (Johri, S., Where India, China and Burma meet. Reviewed by K. Gupta in India Quarterly XIX (1963) 279–282). He asked “what exactly was the quid pro quo,” but referred only to India’s inability to prevent Chinese consolidation of the annexation of Tibet.
See Ch. VI, p. 82.
Press conference of Jan. 18, 1961. Prime Minister on Sino-Indian relations, Vol. II, p. 102.
In its note of Dec. 26, 1959, Peking mentioned the British proposal and added “... but nothing came of it. It is also inconceivable to hold that the territory of another country can be annexed by a unilateral proposal.” China regarded the alignment, which in 1899 Britain proposed as a concession on her part, as an expansionary move.
Defence Minister Chavan in Lok Sabha, Feb. 24, 1964. India News, London, Vol. 17, No. 9.
Lok Sabha Debates, Aug. 14, 1962. Vol. VI, col. 1754–5.
Ibidem, Dec. 10, 1962; Jan. 25 and 27, 1963. Vol. XI, col. 5092; XII, 6512; XIII, 1328.
Eastern World, XVIII (1964) No. 3.
Kripalani, J. B., “For principled neutrality,” Foreign Affairs, 38 (1959) 46–60.
At Peking on Sept. 30, 1959. Current History, 37 (1959) 366.
Kallai, G., “Some questions of peaceful coexistence and class struggle.” World Marxist Review, 4 (1961) No. 10. See also E. Dennis, “On peaceful coexistence: a critique of A Western View.” Ibidem, 3 (1960) No. 4; M. Reimann, “Peaceful coexistence and the class struggle.” Ibidem, No. 10.
Mende, T., Conversations with Nehru, 1958, p. 72.
The ophthalmological diagnosis is from J. P. Narayan. The Economist, Feb. 10, 1962, traced a line of succession from Gladstone through Woodrow Wilson to Pandit Nehru.
New York Times, Jan. 2, 1962.
Jan. 28, 1960. Whittam, D. E., “The Sino-Burmese boundary treaty.” Pacific Affairs (1961) 174–183.
The Economist, (1963) 992–993.
Thompson, K. W., Political realism and the crisis of world politics. Princeton University Press, 1960, p. 127.
As minister without portfolio Lal Bahadur Shastri confirmed non-alignment as the basis of Indian policy but added “there are, however, different situations, different conditions and different times and sometimes we might do things which might appear to others as if they do not fit in with our policy of non-alignment.” Press Club Luncheon, March 28, 1964. India News, London, Vol. 17, No. 14.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1967 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Van Eekelen, W.F. (1967). Conclusions. In: Indian Foreign Policy and the Border Dispute with China. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-6555-8_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-6555-8_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-6436-0
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-6555-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive