1962: The War That Wasn't

by Shiv Kunal Verma

THE HOLY GRAIL OF THE FORWARD POLICY Much has been made of the McMahon Line, with some commentators even mentioning the thickness of the pencil used to demarcate the area west of Khenzemane extending up to the tri-junction with Bhutan, thereby implying that the Nam Ka Chu Valley was indeed on the Tibetan/Chinese side. Also, the fact that the Nam Ka Chu is erroneously marked as flowing north to south on the Morshead-Bailey map has little to do with the alignment of the boundary. These are ridiculous arguments, for they ignore the undisputed boundary line that extends eastwards from the Namgyan Chu towards Bum-la. Geographically, it is the Thagla Ridge that is contiguous and not the Tsangdhar Ridge, as claimed by the Chinese. To also dismiss the McMahon Line as some sort of arbitrary demarcation by the British shows a complete lack of understanding of the watershed principle. The Morshead-Bailey survey was extensive and apart from surveying and mapping the geographical features, the recommendation for the boundary line also took into account all the demographic factors. Tibet’s representative, Lonchen Shatra, had arrived in India for the Simla Conference in 1914 armed with every minute detail pertaining to the Assam-Tibet frontier. As a negotiator, he was no pushover. Furthermore, the British were extremely cautious in their dealing with the Tibetans, as they were with the Chinese. There is little doubt that Tawang was indeed the subject of intense discussion. Eventually, in...