It's not even that. The Chinese claim to Arunachal was concocted to put pressure on India's claim to Aksai Chin, which is strategically important to China as a transportation corridor between E Turkestan and Tibet. That whole region is among the harshest climates in the world, and that's the only area China can build a road throguh.
The ostensible basis for the Chinese claim was that the McMahon line which makes the international border between India and Tibet from the Bhutan to Burma was formalized with the Tibetan government during the Simla conference. China, though she was part of the conference, later claimed that the demarcation was invalid, because Tibet was never independant. :shock: :?:
(That Tibet acted as an independent state during the three-country India-Tibet-China conference with full knowlege and acceptance for China -- and that further, that the boundary demarcation was for the border between India and Tibet and had nothing to do with China are facts the Chinese conveniantly 'overlook' in their official pronouncements.)
The Chinese logic is, since Tibet was never independent, all treaties made with Tibet were invalid, and therefore the boundary with India was never made and China can claim as much as she wants, so she picked a random river and said 'this land up to this is in dispute'
Unlike Aksai Chin which is ethnically Tibetan, Arunachal Pradesh never was in contact with China, it indigenous inhabitants are Hindu and an offshoot of Tibetan Buddhist and have always been a part of India since time immemorial.
Similarly, the (now apparently former) Chinese non-recognition of Sikkim's merger with India is likewise completely out-of-their-mind bogus. Sikkim was subsidiary kingdom, like other Indian kingdoms, during British rule. After independence it became an Indian protectorate.
Massive grass-roots democratic movements in Sikkim demanded from the King that they join India as a full-fledged state, and a refferendum was held where they overwhelmingly (99.8%) voted to join with India, and they did.
BUT the Chinese refused to recognize India's "annexation" of Sikkim :roll: Why?? Well, the Chinese never exactly said.
In both cases, they know they have no right to claim it; the whole thing was a political ploy manufactured so that their forcefull invasion of Aksai Chin could be in the future bargained for against India.
An analogy: Your neighbor steals your lawnmower when you were away on vacation. You come back, realize its stolen and now are in a position to take it back. However, he then claims the shovel and snowblower in your posession that he is no position to take.
Months go by, and you see your neighbor using your lawnmower. Finally, in a gesture of "goodwill" he says he'll stop claiming your snowblower and shovel if you stop claiming the mower he stole.
Voila, his theivery is exchanged for his claims. :?
-Raj
