Context-

The recent visit by a delegation of U.S. lawmakers to Dharamshala underscored the ongoing international focus on Tibet.

Recent Developments

This delegation's arrival followed the passage of the "Promoting a Resolution to the Tibet-China Dispute Act" in both Houses of the U.S. Congress, pending President Joe Biden’s signature. The bipartisan nature of this delegation, invited by the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) managing the affairs of the Tibetan diaspora-in-exile, highlighted the U.S.'s firm stance against China’s repression of Tibetans and its support for renewed dialogue between the Dalai Lama’s representatives and Beijing. Notably, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi emphasized the clarity of the U.S. position on Tibetan freedom, contrasting the enduring legacy of the Dalai Lama with the transient nature of the Chinese presidency.

New Delhi’s Calculated Stance

India's response to the U.S. delegation's activities was significant. External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar hosted the delegation, and Prime Minister Narendra Modi met them the following day. This level of engagement suggests a deliberate move by New Delhi, interpreted by some as a subtle message to Beijing amidst ongoing tensions since the 2020 Galwan clash. However, India’s decision to allow American politicians to prominently engage with the Tibetan refugee community on its soil, promoting U.S. policy, could be perceived as a sign of weakness rather than strength. This situation also raises concerns about India’s carefully calibrated foreign policy narrative on Tibet potentially spiraling out of control.

Historical Context and Policy Framework

India’s approach to Tibet has been nuanced since 1959 when it offered refuge to the Dalai Lama and allowed Tibetan refugees to settle. This action has long served as a strong, silent rebuke to China’s policies in Tibet. Despite this, India has refrained from joining the U.S. in publicly criticizing China over its treatment of Tibetans. India’s recognition of the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) as part of the People's Republic of China dates back to 1954. However, since 2010, China's disregard for India’s territorial integrity has been evidenced by renaming places in Arunachal Pradesh and issuing stapled visas to Jammu and Kashmir residents. India has stopped reiterating a 'One China' policy in official statements.

India's Strategic Balancing Act

India’s current policy framework reflects a balance between respecting China’s sovereignty and supporting Tibetan refugees. New Delhi views the Dalai Lama as a revered spiritual leader, despite China’s accusations of him being a separatist. Furthermore, India does not officially recognize the Tibetan Government in Exile or the Parliament in Exile, viewing them merely as organizing bodies for the Tibetan diaspora. Even though Modi invited the Tibetan Sikyong to his swearing-in ceremony in 2014, he did not extend the same invitation in 2019 or recently. Additionally, in 2018, the Indian government reminded officials to adhere to its policy, discouraging them from attending events commemorating the Dalai Lama’s 60th year in India.

Risks of Outsourcing Policy Narratives

Allowing U.S. lawmakers to champion the Tibetan cause in India could undermine New Delhi’s influence. If India aims to adopt a more assertive stance on Tibet akin to the U.S., Indian leaders should directly articulate their concerns to the Tibetan community. The sight of Tibetan refugees waving U.S. flags, with Indian flags in the minority, underscores this point. Moreover, the Dalai Lama’s subsequent travel to the U.S. for medical treatment further questions the necessity of the U.S. delegation's visit to India.

Strategic Implications for India

Allowing U.S. leaders to deliver messages to Beijing from Indian soil risks sidelining India in a region where it has traditionally been a key player. This scenario is reminiscent of India’s diminishing influence in South Asia, including the Maldives, Sri Lanka, Nepal, and the Indian Ocean islands, where U.S.-China rivalries are intensifying. As the U.S. provides refuge to the Karmapa and accepts more Tibetan refugees, and China tightens control over Tibetan Buddhist monasteries in the TAR, India must reconsider its policy trajectory, especially regarding the Dalai Lama’s succession.

Reclaiming India’s Voice and Leadership

To maintain its leadership in its region, India must reclaim its voice on Tibet and foreign policy issues. This involves asserting its policy narrative independently, without being overshadowed by other global powers. India's unique position, hosting the Tibetan spiritual leader and a significant Tibetan refugee population, grants it a pivotal role in the Tibet issue. By taking a more proactive stance, India can ensure it remains a central figure in the dialogue surrounding Tibet.

Recommendations

1. Acknowledge India's Stakeholder Role: India needs to publicly recognize its stake in issues related to Tibet and Tibetans. While Indian officials do closely monitor developments in Tibet, the current public stance gives the impression that these issues are of minimal concern to India.
2. Formalize a Coordinated Policy: India should establish a comprehensive, coordinated policy on Tibet and Tibetans. This requires collaboration across various Indian agencies, including the Ministry of External Affairs, Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Ministry of Culture, and Ministry of Water Resources. Additionally, state governments in the Himalayan region that share borders with Tibet and those hosting significant Tibetan settlements should be involved.
3. Position on the Dalai Lama Institution: India should formally express its stance on the Dalai Lama institution, recognizing it as an issue of broader significance that impacts followers of Tibetan Buddhism in India, rather than viewing it solely as a Tibetan issue.
4. Clear Position on Dalai Lama Reincarnation: India should publicly adopt a clear and definitive position on the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama, asserting its interests and perspective on the matter.
5. Water Security Strategy: India should prioritize the implications of water resources from the Tibetan Plateau within its national security strategy. Policies should focus on accountability and cooperative management, with India actively participating in relevant United Nations bodies.
6. Recognition of Tibetan Institutions: Existing Tibetan institutions in India, such as the Library of Tibetan Works & Archives, the Tibetan Medical & Astro Institute, and the Tibetan Institute of Performing Arts (all based in Dharamsala), should be recognized as national-level academies by the Indian government.
7. Expand Citizenship Rights for Tibetan Refugees: India should ease the process for Tibetan refugees to apply for Indian citizenship by removing unnecessary restrictions and considerations that currently complicate the process.
8. International Coordination: India should collaborate with like-minded countries, particularly in Europe and the United States, to coordinate approaches and policies on Tibet, ensuring a unified and strategic international stance.

Conclusion

India’s historical and strategic approach to the Tibet issue has been carefully balanced. However, recent developments underscore the need for New Delhi to reassess and possibly recalibrate its stance. By allowing U.S. lawmakers to take the lead on Tibetan issues in India, there is a risk of India’s role being diminished in a matter of significant regional importance. To safeguard its interests and assert its position, India must reclaim its voice and leadership in the Tibetan discourse, ensuring its policy narrative remains robust and independent.

Source- The Hindu