The Editor

Radical Humanist

Dear Sir,

In the Radical Humanist of May 2023 on pages 5-6 some one has
written Notes with the Head line China’s provocation Continues.
The whole perception is totally wrong. China has renamed many
places in Arunachala Pradesh is correct. This is in response to
Indian refusal to settle the boundary through negotiations. In
the eastern Ladakh it is not China but Indian side is provoking
the China by incursion into the Line of Actual control(LAOC).
During the 1962 war China has occupied entire area of Arunachal
Pradesh and on 21 November by unilaterally declaring ceasefire
vacated the whole of 90,000 sq.Kms of Arunachala Pradesh(NEFA as
it was called then) and gave it to India to occupy.

China did not draw map in 1949 showing Tibet in China. Since
long back Chinese maps were showing Tibet as part of China.
There were innumerable relations between China and Tibet. Tibet
was paying tribute to China. In 1720 when the Chinese army came
to Tibet to fight against the occupied Zungar Mongol, Tibet
became a Protected state of China, and in 1793 after Chinese
army defeated the Nepalese army who occupied Tibet, Tibet became
a Chinese province, Chinese rule existed in Tibet upto 1912,
when Chinese revolution took place abolishing the rule of the
King, China could not maintain its army in Tibet, Tibetans after
fighting made an agreement to leave the Chinese army in Tibet.
Tibet was not recognized as an independent state by any other
nation. All nations including America, Britain treated Tibet as
part of China. Tibet remained defacto independent since 1912 but
not dejure. In 1949 Chinese reestablished their rule after a
brief war and 18 points agreement. All these are written by me
in my book Nigudha Tibet(Mysterious Tibet)

The big problem in India is that no body has studied properly in

historical perspective India-China border problem. I have
studied the same in depth with maps and other written evidences
right from the Anglo-Sikh war of 1845-46 with regard to Western
sector, and also right from the days of Ahom Dynasty rule and
Anglo-Burmese war of 1825-26 and Treaty of Yandabo signed on
January 26 1826, with regard to the eastern sector. I have
written and published 7 books on the India-China border dispute
and a book on Tibet all in Kannada which are as follows:

1. Avismaraneeya Arunachala-Unforgettable Arunachala.

2. Aksai Chin vivadada Itihasa-History of Aksai Chin dispute.
3. Madhyama Kshetrada vivadada itihasa-History of India-China
dispute in the Middle sector.
4. Yuddhapurva Kanda-Pre war episode.
5. Yuddha Kanda-War Episode.
6. Yuddhottara Kanda-Post war Episode.
7. Doklam Karma Kanda-Doklam Episode.
8. Nigudha Tibet-Mysterious Tibet.

In no other Indian languages such a comprehensive study of

Sino-Indian border dispute is published.

China has given maps of LOAC and want both sides to adhere to
LOAC and then negotiate for the border. But it is the Indian
side which is intransigent and not ready for negotiations.
Indian rulers both politicians and Bureaucrats are totally
ignorant and trying to cross the LOAC in several place. In the
Pongong lake area point of western bend and the mountain ridge
passing through Ane Law is the LOAC. Where as Indian soldiers
crossed and went to the north of eastern Pangong lake. Chinese
soldiers came and tried to push the Indian soldiers. There
ultimately resulted in an agreement and Indian soldiers withdrew
to the west of Western bend. In the Galwan river area LOAC runs
on the peak of Kugram mountains. Indian side has only few kms
from this range, where as Indian soldiers crossed this mountain
range and went 12 Kms inside LOAC. Chinese soldiers came and
tried to push but Indian soldiers refused. Chinese soldiers in
large number came with Iron rods and hit the Indian soldiers. 21
Indian soldiers died and they withdrew to the spot shown by the
Chinese. An agreement also reached by both sides. So also
another agreement reached at the point north of Gogra. Other two
points remained is at Depsang Bulge. Talks are going on. Hence
It is not the Chinese incurred into Indian area, and it is the
Indian soldiers went into the Chinese side of the LOAC in
eastern Ladakh. All these things appears to be American CIA game
plan to keep India continuously in collision with the China for
the American worldwide strategic purpose. It is no good for
India. Indian politicians have been giving very brave statements
only for political purposes. Army leaders follow the suit. Rahul
Gandhi’s innumerable statements are only for public consumption
for political purposes and are totally wrong.

As for as maps are concerned it was drawn unilaterally both by

the Indian side and Chinese side. In 1954 Nehru added some more
areas of Tibet in the Indian map.

China long back in 1957-62 has reiterated that they will settle
Arunachala Pradesh in Indian favour provided India leaves claim
to Aksai Chin area. Indian side refused called every inch of the
land drawn in 1954 is traditional and customary boundary. This
is actually wrong. Even Jayaprakash Narayan stated “It is not
old maps and treaties that will decide the issue. What is needed
is political settlement, a compromise. India must recognize
China’s interests. China needs Aksai Chin. ……….China likewise
must understand and appreciate India’s case. Only in that spirit
is a settlement possible…… therefore it is necessary that public
opinion is created in this country for a negotiated settlement
of the Border dispute based on give and take, and on a
consideration of the interest of both India and China.” (P.414-
415, Volume-8 JP’s seleted works edited by Bimal Prasad.)

After careful and deep study I have drawn a formula for

settlement of India-China border dispute which is as follows:

Formula for solving India-China Border dispute.

Considering the history, Geography, Strategic interests of both the

countries, on the basis of give and take India should sit for
Negotiations for delineating the border. In the western sector, China
should leave Depsang plain South and west of Karakoram range to Indian
side, India should leave its claim to Aksai Chin area north and east
of Karakoram range to China. Border line from Karakoram pass should
run on Karakoram range(Changlang range) which forms the water shed
line between Indus river of India and Tarim river of China. Line
touches the Lanak law turns towards south, passes through Kone la,
Kepsang la, Demjor La, reaches and runs on the Chang Chenmo mountain
range dividing the waters of Pangong Tso and Chang Chenmo river,
leaving Niyazu pasture to the Chinese side, border line turns towards
south runs on mountain range of Ane la reaches the point of western
bend of Pangong lake, leaving Pangong lake west of the western bend to
the Indian side, east of the western bend to the Chinese side. From
the point of western bend it should run on the same mountain range to
Gaponaga, leaving Murdo and Chusul to the Indian side, Naga and
Spangur area to the Chinese side, reaches Tsaka la, Chang la. From
Chang la it should turn west to Laganskiel pass, running on the
mountain range that separates the waters of Koyul and Hanle river in
Ladakh and Sutlej/Pare chu in Tibet reaches Kyungzing la and from
there to Gya peak leaving Demchok area to the Chinese side. In turn
Chinese should leave four disputed areas in the middle sector, such as
Chuva Chuje/Gui kaurik, Hupsang khad, Nilang Jadhang, Barahoti area to
the Indian side. From Gya peak the line runs on middle Himalayan range
of Gya peak, Leo Porgyal, Reo porgyal, Shipki la, Kunzunm la, Shimdong
la, Thaga la, Tsang chok la, Muling la, Man la, Niti pass, Tun jun
la, Kungri bringri la, Dharma la, from there it reaches Trijunction of
Nepal, Tibet and India. Nepal-Tibet-India trijunction should be
decided jointly by three parties. In Sikkim there is no boundary
dispute. There is already a settled boundary. To the east of Bhutan
China should leave it’s claim to Arunachala Pradesh. With little
necessary modifications Boundary line runs on the Original McMahon
line. The Trijunction between Bhutan, China and India should be
decided by three parties after making joint geographical survey by
three parties boundary line between Bhutan and India, India and China
can be decided on the basis of geographical features. Like wise at the
eastern end Trijunction between Burma Tibet and India should be
decided by three after making joint survey of the area. In disputed
Tsari/Longju area also after making joint survey boundary line should
be decided depending on some geographical feature.

YADUR MAHABALA Date: 14.05.2023

G-3, K.R.WOODS APARTMENT
3RD CROSS, (SEETHA RAMA MANDIRA ROAD)
YELACHENAHALLI, KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD,
BENGALUR-560111
M: 9986829657
Ymahabala11@gmail.com

To the Editor
Radical Humanist, for favour of publication.
History of Arunachala Pradesh.
History of Aksai chin Dispute
Prewar Episode.
War Episode
Post war Episode
Doklam Episode
Mysterious Tibet.