Second, India is using the excuse of “security concern” to interfere in the domestic and foreign affairs of its neighboring countries.

According to the 1890 convention, the Donglang area is part of the Chinese territory, and since then, Donglang has always been under China’s effective jurisdiction. Because the Bhutanese Government objects to the southeastern end defined in the 1890 convention that defines the boundary tri-junction of the three countries, China and Bhutan have, at most, some disagreements over the Donglang area. However, not until 2000, when the 14th round of China-Bhutan border talks was held, did Bhutan make clear its understanding of the alignment of the boundary in the Donglang area. Even then, the decision seemed to be inspired by pressure from India.

This boundary issue should involve only two countries: China and Bhutan. India is not a party with a claim. However, because “Bhutan claims sovereignty over the Donglang area” and “to protect Bhutan,” India illegally crossed the China-India border and entered the Chinese territory.

Moreover, in its reaction to the incident, Bhutan had no idea what India was planning to do. So India, under the guise of justice, sabotaged Bhutan’s foreign affairs and forcefully undermined the efforts by China and Bhutan to resolve border disputes through diplomatic and political means.

China and Bhutan started their border negotiations in the 1980s and have held 24 rounds of talks so far. In August 2016, after the 24th round, Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Liu Zhenmin declared that the two countries’ border negotiations had made great progress in recent years. Despite the progress, the prospects for an agreement remain weak because Bhutan remains so close to India. As for the “Donglang dispute,” China’s position is very clear: China must defend its rights specified in the 1890 convention and strengthen its effective jurisdiction over the Donglang area. This position demonstrates China’s respect for the treaty as well as international law. However, because Bhutan has some disagreements about the 1890 convention, China is willing to negotiate a “packaged solution” through peaceful means.

India often claims it “works closely with Bhutan to prevent damage to both nations’ interests.” But illegally encroaching into China’s territory “for Bhutan” neither aligns with the friendly consultations conducted between China and Bhutan, nor protects Bhutan’s national interests. India’s move is the Modi administration taking advantage of Bhutan to protect its own interests. The event has exposed how India is manipulating Bhutan’s internal and external affairs. The “friendly treaty” signed in 1949 between India and Bhutan stipulates that “Bhutan agrees to accept the guidance of the Indian Government in diplomatic relations.” Not until 2007 were changes made to the imbalanced treaty, the most important of which was changing the word “guidance” into “close cooperation.” But that change seems to be only superficial, and in practice, India seems to be a protective patron of Bhutan.

The 24 rounds of border negotiations over the past 33 years have led to many consensuses between China and Bhutan concerning their boundary areas. Yet, Bhutan has never formally established diplomatic relations with China because of Indian manipulation. Of the 14 nations sharing a border with China, only Bhutan lacks formal diplomatic ties with China. And Bhutan is one of only two countries with an ongoing border issue with China.

The other country is of course India. Using Bhutan as a pawn fails to capitalize on Bhutan’s strategic advantages due to its geographic position directly between the world’s two largest emerging economies. Bhutan could be enjoying the fruits of development, but it remains one of the least developed countries in the world. territorial sovereignty and problems left by history, they share enough mutual dependence in geopolitics, complementary positions in development, mutual reliance in national strategies, and cultural connections to develop a rich and mutually beneficial relationship. For the two emerging economies with huge populations and long histories, ensuring that both governments optimally benefit their peoples during development is the primary goal of bilateral cooperation.

Chinese President Xi Jinping stressed that China and India, as the two largest developing countries in the world, should properly manage and handle disagreements and sensitive issues when he met Modi in Astana, Kazakhstan, on June 9. Modi agreed and noted that the two countries should explore the potential for cooperation, strengthen communication and coordination in international affairs and respect each other’s core interests and major concerns. However, the standoff in Donglang unfolded, clearly caused by the Indian Government when those words were still fresh.

New Delhi unilaterally opted to forgo “properly” handling disagreements in favor of triggering a larger dispute. The incident will leave a deep and prolonged strain on China-India relations. Considering the current development status and bilateral relations of the two countries, it will likely destabilize regional and global cooperation between China and India, considering how aggressively the Modi administration addresses disagreements. Furthermore, India will suffer a tarnished image in the eyes of Chinese people and less favorable policy by China.

New Delhi’s misjudgment

India, a civilization of over five millennia, is the second most populated country in the world, following only China. Governed by a multiparty system since 1952, the politically mature country would not make such poor decisions if common sense was a guiding principle of the current government. The standoff persists and casts a dark shadow over the entire region.

The incident was created by Indian strategists, particularly Modi’s policy consultants, who have shown an obsession with absolute security that has driven the Indian Government to treat perceived security threats as real, even at the cost of disturbing the domestic and foreign affairs of other countries, including Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bhutan. The driving motive for the Modi administration to cause this standoff is Indian strategists’ concern that the Siliguri Corridor, India’s strategic strip, would be threatened if China builds roads to Mount Gipmochi. These analysts are intimidating themselves, however, and creating an illusory new cold war to keep themselves relevant. Such concerns