Haul up China in UNHRC for commiting 'War of Crime' at Galwan for using 'Weapons of Torture'

Satish Chandra (1965 batch Indian Foreign Service officer) was the first Secretary of the National Security Council (NSCS) when it was set up in 1999 and later become the Deputy National Security Advisor. As a diplomat, he has headed India’s High Commission to Pakistan (1995-98), and was Ambassador to the Philippines (1989-1992). He was also India’s Permanent Representative of the UN office in Geneva from 1992 to 1995, when India had started liberalizing its economy.

Besides representing India at a variety of multilateral fora including the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), WHO (World Health Organization), ILO (International Labour Organization), and the UN Human Rights Commission, he has also served as the President of the Conference on Disarmament during his assignment in Geneva. He spoke to Vijay Thakur, the Special Representative of the Statesman, on the recent developments along Indo-China border in Ladakh. Excerpts:

BY Vijay Thakur, Special Representative, The Statesman, vijaythakurx@gmail.com

Question

Indo-China border problem is very old. Of late tension along Indo-China border has been worsening. First it was Doklan and now Galwan how you see all this.

Answer

There are many factors, but to my mind the major factor is a combination of two or three things. One China is a hegemonic power it does not accept multipolarity in Asia. And because India wants to maintain strategic autonomy in the region, it regards India as an obstacle in Asia.

There are a few more added factors like India’s deterrence capabilities in terms of comprehensive power is much less than that of China. I am not talking in terms of nuclear capabilities but in terms of comparative strength between China and India. And the gap of deterrence capabilities between the two has increased over the years.

Another main reason is that we have always been accommodative with China even when it hurt our core interests. We have not done anything when it opposed us in UN Security Council in case of India’s membership to the UN Security Council, or when it comes to declaring Masood Azhar as a global terrorist. So China got used to of accepting India for granted in many ways. Irrespective of political parties in power, India has always taken a softer and accommodative stand with China. It took us to the UN Security Council three times on Kashmir, and we did nothing.

Question:

What is your take on the Galwan Valley clash between the Indian and Chinese troops on 15 June night that claimed the lives of 20 Indian soldiers? This was the worst India-China clash on the LAC in nearly half a century that happened despite various existing bilateral agreements as well as PM Modi’s major push to enhance and upgrade relations with Xi Jinping-led China. Why did it happen?

Answer

The Galwan Valley scuffle is a very serious issue. This is the highest number of death we have reported after Nathula clash in 1966. Earlier they used to have faceoff at one point at a time, but this time the faceoff has been marked by aggressive Chinese posturing along with scuffles at five or six places mainly in the Pangong Lake area, Naku La in Sikkim and most recently it was in the Galwan Valley on 15-16 June.

Actually, in the garb of 1993 agreement and the CBMs (Confidence Building Measures) agreed upon thereafter, China is encroaching our territory inch by inch for the past two decades. Now they are trying to grab more and more Indian Territory and change the ground realities of the Line of Actual Control.

India had committed its first big mistake in 1993 when it accepted the concept of Line of Actual Control (LAC). Unfortunately, even after 27 years, the LAC is not defined, it is not understood clearly, and there is a great deal of ambiguity. The LAC was never demarcated and both countries have a different impression of LAC. I think, what we are seeing today was inbuilt into the mechanism of the LAC because it lacks clarity.

Secondly, the kind of agreements and CBM measures we signed in 1995, 2005, 2012 and 2013 were also in India’s interest. The commitment from the Indian side that we would maintain maximum restrain and not fire was actually favouring China.

 

Question

How do you think we can de-escalate and defused the situation through diplomatic and political dialogue at the highest levels?

Anwer:

We must accept the fact that the decision on the Galwan faceoff was not taken locally, it must have been a top-level decision. That's why it is a very serious issue and would affect Indo-China relations for ever. It would take longer to build up similar kind of relationship again.

Personally I am happy that the mood has changed in the government and India has taken a tough stand. It has categorically announced that Indian Army commanders can use the weapon according to the situation. I went through the statements made by the government of India on Galwan faceoff. Those were not mere rash statements. PM’s statement on Galwan was a measured, well-considered and a firm statement. India said it wants peace, wants to deescalate the situation, but at the same time maintained that it would not compromise with its territory. Talks are going on at various military and diplomatic level and hopefully, the issue would settle down soon.

 

Question

Beijing is now staking claim over Galwan Valley that New Delhi has outright dismissed. Both countries are nuclear-armed and major global powers. Going forward, what should be the roadmap for India-China relationship?

Answer

Defence Minister’s statement that Indian Army commanders can use the weapon according to the situation is an indication of what is going to be India’s future roadmap. This means the 1996 agreement of not using weapons is apparently over. India has indirectly told its officers on the ground that the restrained of not using weapon has been lifted. But still, there are many more things we need to do.

For quick action, India should give a befitting reply to the Chinese aggression along the LAC. If the military situation is not favourable at one point than we should look for an alternate option at other places. Indian Army commanders should be allowed to take countervailing actions.

Since 1993 we have been discussing LAC, we had 22 or 23 rounds of talk but nothing happened. Let's take the Galwan incident as an opportunity and press for the settlement of LAC issue in a time-bound manner—maybe six months.. a year… or one and a half year. India should Categorically tell Chinese authorities that if you do not resolve the LAC issue within a specified time frame, India would not accept the concept of LAC anymore.

Question:

Should we take up the present faceoff on the international forum and expose the barbaric acts of China?

Answer:

Yes India should take up the violations that took place in the Galwan valley by Chinese authorities and haul it up for before the UN Human Right Council (UNHRC). Chinese Army used ‘weapons of torture’ that caused ‘superfluous and unnecessary injuries'. The present situation in Galwan valley legally qualifies as an International Armed Conflict. And as per Article 12 sub clause (II) of the UN Human Right Conventions the use the ‘weapons of torture’ is prohibited. Imagine they used baton with spike, iron rods with barbed wire to attack our soldiers. All this strictly violates the ‘Methods and means of warfare’ during International Armed Conflicts under Part III Section I Article 35 of the 1977 Additional Protocols to the 1949 Geneva Conventions.

We must expose China before the world that it is not a civilized state. The world must know that It is a barbaric nation and has no respect for Human rights. Further, we must develop a comprehensive strategy to handle china and should be more vocal to the way China handles Hongkong, Taiwan, Tibet and Xingxiang. India must support their cause on international forum. We should become much more active on these issues particularly where China is committing human right violations.

India should take this opportunity to further strengthen its ties with Taiwan, develop long term business association to take advantage of technological advancements of Taiwan to help to improve our domestic industry.

Ends.