Panchsheel is back in the spotlight. On June 28, Chinese President Xi Jinping gave an “important” speech about the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, known as Panchsheel in India. Addressing a conference marking Panchsheel’s 70th anniversary in Beijing, Xi combined these principles with his concept of a global security initiative, envisioning a shared future for mankind.
According to PTI, the principles gained traction with the Non-Aligned Movement to end present-day conflicts, and today, China aims to expand its influence in the Global South amid its tussle with the West.
The Tibet Agreement
Xi’s speech overlooked the origin of Panchsheel. It was the preamble for the ‘Tibet Agreement’ or “Agreement on Trade and Intercourse between the Tibet region of China and India,” signed on April 29, 1954. Zhou Enlai, then Chinese premier, added the preamble to make India’s surrender of its rights in Tibet more palatable.
Contrary to PTI’s assertion, the Indian side believed there was no boundary issue between India and China. During the four months of negotiations leading to the agreement, the border was never mentioned. Prime Minister Nehru believed the preamble would be the cornerstone of future friendship between India and China.
In my book, *The Panchsheel Agreement – Born in Sin*, I detailed how the agreement was a nail in the coffin of a free and independent Tibet. Despite Nehru’s praise for the agreement, the delegations were miles apart during negotiations. The main objective was to regulate trade and pilgrimage between India and Tibet.
Lack of Trust
A telling incident during negotiations showed the lack of confidence between India and China. The Indian translators used “Chhota Mota Vyapar” for ‘petty trade’ in the Hindi version of the agreement. The Chinese delegation suspected a trick behind the idiomatic phrase and took two weeks to be convinced of its correctness.
The Dalai Lama’s government in Lhasa was not informed of the talks, even as Delhi preached the emancipation and freedom of colonized nations in Asia and Africa. Nehru’s focus was already on the Indochina conflict and the upcoming Geneva conference to end French colonization.
Zhou Enlai’s subtle message at the time of the Tibet Agreement signature went unnoticed in India. He declared that only matters “ripe for settlement” had been solved, implying the boundary issue was not agreed upon.
Before the Tibet Conference, diplomats like Sir Girja Shankar Bajpai advised India to force Beijing to recognize the traditional boundary between India and Tibet, but this advice was ignored. The agreement resulted in Tibet becoming a ‘Region of China,’ the establishment of consulates and trade agencies, and facilitating pilgrimages, but omitted recognition of significant border passes.
Continuing Issues
The lack of trust was evident in Article IV, where China objected to including a route in the agreement, citing a disputed area in Ladakh. The Indian ambassador, N Raghavan, insisted on its inclusion but ultimately gave away India’s cards.
The Panchsheel Today
Seventy years later, Xi Jinping promotes a community with a shared future for mankind, rooted in traditional Chinese culture. However, India has learned the hard way about this ‘excellent traditional Chinese culture,’ particularly since 2020 in Ladakh.
The Case of Barahoti
Just two months after the Tibet Agreement, the first Chinese incursion in the Barahoti area occurred in June 1954, leading to hundreds of incursions and culminating in the Chinese attack in October 1962. Ironically, it was China that complained about an Indian incursion in Barahoti.
Despite the Panchsheel Agreement, future events showed that for Beijing, it was a mere piece of paper. John Lall’s book, *Panchsheel and After*, noted that friendly co-existence ended less than three months after the agreement, with China sending the first signal by its actions in Barahoti.
As Acharya Kripalani once said in Parliament, the Tibet (Panchsheel) Agreement was indeed ‘born in sin.
