How did the McMahon line come about?

 How did the McMahon line come about?

Hello, Im Dong Jianing. Today, Id like to talk about the border issue between China and India. The border conflict between China and India is continuous, and there are very complex historical reasons. I will try to make it clear. There are three sections in the disputed area along the border between China and India. The western section is mainly the Aksai Qinling area, with a disputed area of about 30000 square kilometers, close to two Beijing areas. China has actual control. The word aksaicin is translated from Turkic phonetics. Aksai means baishitan and Qin has two explanations: one is Shankou, the other is China. This is the only place for Xinjiang to enter Tibet. During the Yongzheng period of the Qing Dynasty, an extension and establishment Bureau was set up here. Why dont Indians accept it? Its up to Britain.

In 1865, the British sent William Johnson, an official of the Bureau of Indian survey, to dive into the south, drew a border line, Johnson line, and drew the border line between China and India to the north to the Kunlun Mountains. Nearly 30000 square kilometers of land, including aksaichin, were transferred to British India. I didnt know the Qing government. The basis of Indias discontent is the Johnson line. But later, in 1898, Britain put forward a demarcation plan, the Macartney MacDonald line, which was to transfer aksaicin to the Qing government. George Macartney is British Consul General in Kashgar, and Claude Maxwell MacDonald is British minister in Qing Dynasty. The Qing government didnt respond, and Britain regarded it as acquiescence.

It can be seen that the British have different versions of ideas about the northeast border of Kashmir. In fact, China not only has indisputable sovereignty over Aksai Chin, but also the Ladakh area to the west of Aksai Chin is Chinas hometown, which should be returned to China. Without the consent of the Qing government, Britain occupied Ladakh, which was under the jurisdiction of the local government of Tibet in China. Since the Qing Dynasty, China has never recognized Ladakh as a foreign country.

There are four disputed areas in the middle of the China India border, covering a smaller area of more than 2000 square kilometers. India and China each actually control part of it. The eastern part is the sore point of the border issue between China and India. In the disputed area, China calls it southern Tibet, and India calls it Arunachal Pradesh. The disputed territory is about 90000 square kilometers, larger than Chongqing.

In 1962, China and India fought a war, and China won a great victory. However, India took the initiative to withdraw 20 kilometers, and India regained control of the region. Because it is Chinas self-defense counterattack, military and political war, or political and military war, we express our sincerity to solve the border issue peacefully, and we will not fall into the mire and trap set by some countries for China. Such a gorgeous retreat is also rare in the history of World War. Let alone, under the harsh terrain and climate conditions of roof of the world, China has also created a miracle of logistics supply. The aksaichin area mentioned above is the only place where the new Tibet highway must pass. It is of strategic significance and cannot be allowed for an inch or a moment. However, in the south of Tibet, we still have room to put and put freely and wait for the opportunity.

The historical account of the dispute over the border between Tibet and the South should still be taken into account by the British. After the outbreak of the 1911 Revolution, the Qing government officials and troops were expelled in Tibet. Britain sent troops to the south of Tibet and directly occupied Dawang and other areas. The British action is to separate Tibet from China. In October 1913, in order to solve the problem of Tibet, Britain planned a meeting with the government of the Republic of China, the British government and the government of the Tibet region. When it comes to Tibet, there is no need for local representatives from Tibet to attend. Only the government of the Republic of China and the British government can attend, which is what the government of the Republic of China requires. But the British government was first sophistry, then threat, and China had to agree to Tibets presence, but it could only discuss with others.

Prior to the talks, the UK contacted with the representative of Tibets local government Xia Zha in advance, asking her to put forward a very excessive request, which the government of the Republic of China would definitely disagree with, and then the UK took the attitude of mediation to rub together a central condition. In October 1913, the three-party talks were held in the northern Indian city of Simla, which is the historical Simla Conference. Xiazha, the representative of the Tibetan regional government, first raised an absurd and outrageous demand that Tibet should be independent, and that the territory involved should not only include Tibet, but also all and not all of Qinghai, as well as parts of Xinjiang, Gansu, Sichuan and Yunnan.

Of course, the government of the Republic of China could not agree. At this time, Britain came to mediate: Henry McMahon, the British negotiator, said that, in this way, it is not independent. China has suzerain sovereignty over Tibet, but at the same time, Tibet is divided into external Tibet and internal Tibet. Tibet exercises autonomy, and China cannot send troops. This is an attempt to split part of Tibet, and the government of the Republic of China cannot accept it.

The three parties involved in the Simla Conference have met several times before and after, with a time span of 9 months. No consensus has been reached, and the negotiation is fruitless. However, during this period, in March 1914, the British were sinister. McMahon and the Tibetan government of gaxia met secretly in Delhi, leaving aside the government of the Republic of China. In this contact, the two sides confirmed a line, the infamous McMahon line. What is this McMahon line? That is, a section of the border between China and India has been moved more than 100 kilometers northward, from the southern foothills of the Himalayas to the ridge.

In this way, 90000 square kilometers of Chinese territory, such as menyu, Luoyu and Chayu, were assigned to India, which was still British India at that time. This line is based on the mapping of a British spy, Fredrick Marshall Bailey. In 1913, Bailey, disguised as a traveller, infiltrated the southeast of Tibet and made a secret investigation for more than half a year by means of deception. The mapping data provided an important reference for the processing of McMahon line. The Tibet Regional Government also disagrees with the delimitation of the McMahon line. But McMahon said that you need our nod and cooperation when you think about independence in the future. Besides, can we change this line in the future? If you are not satisfied with it in the future, you can change it a little more. In this way, mcmahonnen threatened to cajole the Tibetan government into agreeing to the agreement.

However, no matter how you two agree to this agreement, it is invalid. This is an agreement bypassing the then central government of China: the government of the Republic of China. However, the government of the Republic of China is very weak and unable to face the worlds largest power. Yuan Shikai is also under the pressure of the people of the whole country and can only deal with each other on the issue of the scope of internal and external Tibet. In April 1914, McMahon issued an ultimatum that China would no longer accept the so-called mediation agreement of the British side, and announced that the meeting would break down. Britain would directly conclude a treaty with Tibet. Chen Yifan, Chinas representative, was shocked and initialed the draft treaty and the attached drawings without reporting them to the central government for ratification. The treaty includes the illegal McMahon line.

After the contents of the initials were transmitted back to China, Yuan Shikais government immediately sent a telegram to Chen Yifan and immediately announced: 1. Cancel the initials. Two, do not recognize all treaties and documents signed by Mcmahon and representatives of Tibet in secret. Successive Chinese governments have not recognized the validity and legitimacy of these documents.

The document signed this time is three no products. China doesnt admit it. What about the other two? In theory, Tibets local representatives can only attach their signatures to treaties, and they cannot be on the same level as the representatives of China and the UK. At that time, McMahon promised many demands of the local government of Tibet, which could not be fulfilled later. The local government of Tibet also said that it would not count if he agreed to the McMahon line. On the British side, the British government never authorized McMahon to discuss the border issue between China and India and sign bilateral treaties between Britain and Tibet, and repeatedly instructed McMahon not to sign bilateral treaties with Tibet if China refused. In July 1914, Harding, governor of India, made it clear that the issue of Indias northeast border was not part of the responsibilities of the Simla Conference. McMahons views and suggestions on this issue were not approved by the Indian government. In addition, it is against international treaties to enter into separate contracts with local governments and to occupy the territory of a country.

The McMahon line, which was signed on the illegal treaty in 1914, has not actually entered into force, the official map of the British Indian authorities has not been modified, and the administration has not crossed the traditional dividing line. It seems that this matter has passed like this. If no one mentions it again, everyone should have nothing happened. But more than 20 years later, an accident in 1935 made the McMahon line move from conspiracy to reality.

What happened then? In 1935, Olaf caroe, the Deputy Secretary of the foreign affairs and Political Department of the British Indian government, stumbled upon the documents about the McMahon line. He was so precious that India had such a territory, so he began to take this chapter. On November 5, the British Indian government put forward for the first time the effective view of McMahon line. Carol suggested that it should be done in a practical way. A few years ago, in 1929, we published a set of books, in fact, a set of treaty collection, called the Acheson treaty collection. This collection contains many contracts signed by British India. It is a more formal publication, but this collection does not contain the contents of the Simla treaty and the McMahon line. We can add this part to one of the volumes.

The shameless Olaf Karo proposed to tamper with history and map the frontier. The same shameless British government read Carols letter and said, Hey, this man is full of brains. He can change it. I think it can work.. In July 1936, the British Department of Indian Affairs approved the proposal, but required that when publishing the treaty, it should strive to avoid unnecessary publicity and not attract the attention of newspapers and news organizations. Change the book quietly, dont talk about it. In August 1938, the British and Indian governments secretly published the fake edition of Volume 14 of the Acheson treaty collection, adding the contents of the Simla treaty and the McMahon line.

In fact, the volume had been published in 1929, which was easy to handle. The British and Indian governments carried out a comprehensive recovery and destruction. In the original version, there were not only no documents of the Simla Conference, but also specially stated in the Chronicle concerning Tibet: the trilateral Treaty of the Simla Conference was initialed in 1914, but the Chinese government did not allow its plenipotentiary to sign officially. In the new pseudo version, this paragraph has also been modified.

Li Tiezheng, a Chinese scholar, was the first to find out that the British and Indian governments had falsified the treaty collection. In the early 1950s, when he was doing academic research in the United States to write a book about Tibet, when he looked up the materials, he found that the British and Indian governments had cheated that year. Later, the research of many Chinese and foreign scholars confirmed Li Tiezhengs discovery. Li Tiezheng was born in 1906 in Changsha County, Hunan Province. He once worked as a diplomat of the national government. After the founding of new China, he went to the United States to study international relations and international politics. In 1964, he returned to the motherland and served as a professor of the school of Foreign Affairs. Later, he served as a member of the Standing Committee of the National Committee of the Chinese peoples Political Consultative Conference. He died in 1990.

After Indias independence, from the Nehru government, but from several aspects, I think that from the perspective of history, geography, habits and traditions, the McMahon line is the customary line, the traditional line. Does that make sense? In the southern foothills of the eastern Himalayas, three parts, i.e. y u00fc, Luoyu and Chayu, have been under the control and influence of Tibetan culture. In Tibetan, these three places mean valley area with low heat and many trees, south area and place where miscellaneous people live. Local people are not like Indians in origin, language, appearance or cultural habits. Like the Tibetans, they are Mongolian. Their language is Tibeto Burmese of the Chinese Tibetan language family. They mostly use Tibetan and Tibetan calendar. Their religion is Tibetan Buddhism.

The Indian government also said that the McMahon line was determined by nature and geography. Follow the watershed at the top of the Himalayas. Because it is a watershed principle, it is naturally effective. Is that right? First of all, the boundary between countries, of course, should be formed naturally by history, not by geography alone. To say the least, is the McMahon line in line with the watershed principle? What is the watershed? It is the mountain between two adjacent basins. The Himalayas do not have the characteristics of Watershed at all. The watershed of Indus River, Yarlung Zangbo River and Brahmaputra River is Gangdise mountain and Nianqing Tanggula Mountain.

In order to justify itself, the Indian government can only redefine the watershed. They have reinvented geography by saying that watersheds are ridges that separate the major flows into the rivers of the two countries.. This is against science at all. When a river basin is shared by two countries, how can we calculate the flow of each river? In fact, there are many tributaries in the same river, and there can be many watersheds between them. The McMahon line can only be said to be arbitrary, and there is no only certainty.

The Indian government has to continue to lie that the McMahon line is along the ridge. The problem is that the Himalayas are made up of many ridges, none of which are unique and continuous. On the contrary, the geographical features of the southern foothills of the Himalayas are more distinct than the McMahon line, and the uplifted mountains in the plain are as clear as the walls.

The historical reasons of the disputed areas along the border between China and India are complex, but in the final analysis, it is mainly the role played by the UK that causes this situation. However, if India wants to cause trouble in the border area, it will not stop at these historical disputes. For example, even the illegal McMahon line has been crossed many times by Indian troops. You should know that there is only one officially demarcated border between China and India, namely Sikkim section. In June 2017, the Indian army entered the undisputed Dong Lang area between China and India under the name of Bhutan government help, and confronted with the Chinese border forces for 71 days. Recently, first in NAKURA in the northern region of Sikkim, and then in the valley of gallevan in Ladakh region, India has repeatedly crossed the line of actual control, resulting in violations and provocations, resulting in conflicts between the two sides.

Both China and India need a peaceful international environment. The land border disputes between China and Russia, Vietnam and other countries have been solved in succession, but the territorial disputes with India have not progressed. Why is that? First of all, of course, its related to Indias nationalist sentiment. Starting from Nehru, the father of India, India said, India cant play a second-class role in the world. It can either be a powerful country or disappear.

But in addition to paying attention to the rising nationalism in India in the process of modernization, I think history also reminds us that the border issue between China and India is complicated because it involves Chinas Tibet issue, which is a special place. The Tibet issue has always been a card frequently played by western countries. In todays program, we talked about the aksaichin region, the southern Tibet region, the history of the McMahon line, and the Chinese scholar Li Tiezheng, hoping to give you a better understanding.

If you think this video is useful and enlightening to you, or you want to discuss it with your friends, I hope you can forward this video, or give it to a third company, or just give us a compliment, we can work harder to do it. In this period, we still want 300000 compliments. Today is June 18. Its a shopping day. Id like to draw a big prize for you. Its a set of Empire of the Qin Dynasty, a version published by CITIC press and signed by the author sun Haohui. Its very precious and is specially given to our observers. It is believed that everyone is familiar with the Empire of the Qin Dynasty. It is a great work by Mr. Sun Haohui, and there are three series. There are 17 copies of this set of CITIC press. I see that there is also a big discount on the book buying website, which costs 299 yuan at a 50% discount. Within 48 hours from this videos launch in station B, I will use my invitation code 666 to buy a friend of an observer, and I will take one of them out to give this gift.

(function(){( window.slotbydup=window .slotbydup||[]).push({id:u6056789,container:ssp_ 6056789, async:true });}) (); source of this paper: observer net editor in charge: Yao Wenguang_ NN1682