[ Ripi Bagra ]
The recent problem involving stapled visas for Indian citizens from Arunachal Pradesh has once again raised concerns over the already tense relationship between India and China.
Three athletes from Arunachal, who were part of India’s Asian Games delegation, received stapled visas. These same athletes had faced a similar issue in July when they travelled to Chengdu, China, for the World University Games. This is not an isolated incident; in the past, other individuals from Arunachal, including a weightlifter and an official from the Indian Weightlifting Federation, were also denied entry to China due to the issuance of stapled visas. Additionally, two teenage archers and five karate athletes from Arunachal faced similar problems when attempting to participate in international competitions in China.
In international politics, when one country disputes another’s authority over a specific territory, it often refuses to grant proper visas to residents of that territory. Instead, it issues stapled visas as a way to protest the territorial status of those individuals. China has employed this practice concerning Indian citizens from Arunachal, which it claims as part of its own territory. A stapled visa is a visa that is affixed to a separate piece of paper, rather than being stamped directly into the passport. This practice began in 2009 when China started giving stapled visas to residents of Arunachal who are Indian nationals.
China’s issuance of stapled visas to residents of Arunachal stems from its territorial claim over the region, which it refers to as ‘South Tibet’ or ‘Zangnan’. In contrast, India asserts its claim based on the McMahon Line, which was established during the 1914 Shimla Conference. Despite India’s effective control over Arunachal, China refuses to recognise the McMahon Line, leading to tensions.
China’s rationale for issuing stapled visas is seen as a way to avoid explicitly acknowledging Indian sovereignty over Arunachal.
Conversely, India views this practice as a challenge to its sovereignty and its internationally recognised borders. India maintains a clear and consistent position that Arunachal is an integral part of the country and opposes discrimination against Indian citizens based on their place of residence or ethnicity.
The Indian government argues that China’s two-track visa policy effectively disputes India’s international borders, infringing on its national sovereignty and territorial integrity. In response to China issuing new electronic passports that depict Arunachal as part of China, the Indian embassy in Beijing retaliated by stamping its map on Chinese visas.
The current situation calls for a thoughtful resolution in line with the bilateral agreements on confidence-building measures signed in 1993, 1996, and 2005. It is essential to ensure that, in resolving border disputes, the interests of the populations living in the border areas are safeguarded, as outlined in the ‘political parameters and guiding principles’ agreed upon in 2005.
China should take into account the interests of Indian citizens from Arunachal when granting visas. Once again, the issuance of stapled visas has triggered public outrage and protests in the state. People in Arunachal view these visas as an affront to their Indian identity and a challenge to India’s sovereignty over the region. They express their unwavering support for India’s position on Arunachal as an integral part of the country. They view themselves as proud Indian citizens and emphasise their loyalty to the Indian state.
The reactions of locals to the issuance of stapled visas reflect the deep-seated concerns and sentiments. They aim to highlight the importance of maintaining India’s territorial integrity and sovereignty over Arunachal while calling for a peaceful resolution to the border dispute with China.
Overall, diplomatic efforts are needed to resolve this issue and minimise its impact on bilateral relations between India and China. This incident comes at a time when both countries are facing a trust deficit, making it even more crucial to bridge this gap. Such incidents contribute to negative perceptions of China among Indians and affect the progress of the bilateral relationship. The resolution of this issue depends on the progress in negotiations over the border dispute. (The contributor is a PhD candidate from JNU, New Delhi)
