Why can't the Indian government propose to the Chinese a corridor circumambulating the Holy Mountain where people from both sides could perform the yatra again? asks Claude Arpi.
On December 18, 2024, the 23rd meeting of the Special Representatives (SRs) of India and China took place in Beijing.
The delegations were headed by Ajit Doval, the national security advisor, and Wang Yi, member of the politburo of the Chinese Communist party and minister of foreign affairs.
It was the first meeting SR meeting since the Galwan clash of June 2020.
The SRs not only reemphasised the implementation of the recent 'disengagement' agreement 'resulting in patrolling and grazing in relevant areas', but they also reiterated 'the importance of maintaining a political perspective of the overall bilateral relationship while seeking a fair, reasonable and mutually acceptable framework for settlement of the boundary question.'
It is extremely doubtful if a mutually acceptable solution for the boundary can be found in the present conditions, especially with the current turmoil in the Chinese ministry of national defence and the Central Military Commission -- two ministers and one CMC member lost their jobs in the previous two years.
Further, the trust is not yet present between the two Asian giants; the SRs could not even issue a joint statement.
It is worth noting that Doval called on Han Zheng, vice president of the People's Republic of China, but did not meet President Xi Jinping.
However the SRs discussed various measures to maintain peace and tranquility on the border and the Chinese statement even speaks 'of strengthening confidence-building measures (CBMs)'.
What can be done?
One of the possible CBMs is through pilgrimage.
A lot has recently been written in the Indian media about another example of a pilgrimage, -- the Kartarpur corridor between India and Pakistan; it is a mutual gesture of goodwill agreed upon despite the tough reality and difficulties between both countries.
The corridor on the Indian side starts from Dera Baba Nanak in Gurdaspur district before crossing the international border; the Gurdwara Darbar Sahib Kartarpur is across the border on the banks of the river Ravi.
Both governments agreed to the development of a corridor to enable the smooth passage of pilgrims seeking to visit Guru Nanak's final resting place.
It is certainly a field to explore on the north-eastern border, as pilgrimage always played an important role in India's relationship with Tibet.
It could provide a bridge between both sides of the Himalaya and in the future become a major confidence building measure between China and India.
The Panchsheel Agreement between India and China
The Tibet Agreement, also known as the Panchsheel Agreement for its preamble, was signed in April 1954; both nations agreed to put the age-old relation between India and Tibet in a legal framework.
It was all about trade and pilgrimage in Tibet.
Article III of the 1954 Tibet Agreement says: 'The High Contracting Parties agree that pilgrimage by religious believers of the two countries shall be carried on in accordance with custom.'
The Agreement mentioned that for an Indian pilgrim to go on the Kailash pilgrimage (yatra), he just needed a valid passport and a visa from China.
After the 1962 War, pilgrimage was temporarily stopped but on June 28, 1981, then Chinese minister of foreign affairs Huang Hua told a press conference in New Delhi: 'The Chinese side has informed the Indian side that it will make temporary arrangements for a certain number of Indian pilgrims to go on pilgrimage to what the Indians call the Kailash Mountain and Mansarovar Lake. As for long term arrangements, we will discuss them with the Indian side through diplomatic channels.'
Since then, the pilgrimage has been allowed to take place, with ups and downs (it is completely down since 2020!).
One of the SRs' decisions was to reopen the Kailash Yatra.
Why not go a step further?
The Tsari Yatra
In the Tibetan psyche, Tsari has always been synonymous with 'sacred place'.
With Mount Kailash and the Amye Machen in eastern Tibet, the pilgrimage around the Dakpa Shelri, the 'Pure Crystal Mountain', has, for centuries, been one of the holiest of the Roof of the World.
The latter could be considered as a CBM. The last Rongkor (Ravine Yatra) took place in 1956.
I recently visited Upper Subansiri in Arunachal Pradesh and it became obvious that one of the best CBMs would be to reopen the Tsari Rongkor (yatra).
After crossing the Tibet-India border, the pilgrimage used to proceed southwards along the Tsari Chu (river) and then turn westwards in the Subansiri Valley.
The trek goes up to the last Indian village of Taksing before crossing again in Tibet, taking the direction of Yume, the first Xiaokang (model) village into Tibet (adopted by Xi Jinping in 2017).
The southern leg of the Rongkor procession crosses the tribal areas of Upper Subansiri; this was the territory of the Nah and Mra clans of the Tagin tribe who lived downstream the Tsari Chu Valley, around its confluence with the Subansiri at Gelensiniak and in Taksing.
The Pure Crystal Mountain
Even the finalisation of the modalities of the pilgrimage could be an exercise to built trust between the two countries.
The 'Pure Crystal Mountain' lies at 5,735 metres above the sea in the Tsari area of southern Tibet; the Tsari Yatra used to take place every Monkey Year, often special years (during 1956, the Dalai Lama and the Panchen Lama visited India on the occasion of the 2500th anniversary of the birthday of the Buddha, but it also witnessed a last circumambulation around the Dakpa Shelri).
Toni Huber, the foremost scholar on the subject, wrote a great deal about the site of the pilgrimage, located in India and Tibet: 'The large-scale, 12-yearly circumambulation of Tibetan Buddhist pilgrims around the mountain known as the Rongkor Chenmo, had the character of a state ritual for the Ganden Phodrang (the Dalai Lamas government). Pilgrims in this huge procession crossed the McMahon Line below the frontier village of Migyitun in Tsari district,' writes Huber.
During the 1914 Simla Conference, Frederick Bailey, who had mapped the area with his colleague Captain Henry Morshead, informed Sir Henry McMahon about the sensitivity of the issue and on their recommendation, a condition was inserted in the border agreement to reassure the Tibetans that the yatra would not be disturbed despite the fact that it was crossing into India's territory; further India always facilitated the smooth continuation of the Tsari pilgrimage on the Indian side of the border, at least till the last Rongkor in 1956 which passed off peacefully.
It was the only place on the north-eastern border where religious considerations (and not the watershed) were accepted as the principle to delineate the boundary.
Visiting the area is in itself a great spiritual experience, but also adventurous.
Till last year there was no road to Taksing and visitors and defence forces had to walk three to four days from the road head near Limeking village.
The dense, almost impenetrable, jungle on both sides of the tumultuous Tsari and Subansiri rivers must have been, the experience of a lifetime for the yatris (for those who survived).
Nearly 70 years after the last pilgrimage, driving on the still difficult roads, one wonders how the pilgrims could survive without supply points, medical facilities or basic bridges to cross from one side to the other of the two rivers.
The local tribal population (the Nah and the Mra clans of the Tagin tribe) had the reputation of being ferocious and were feared by the Tibetan yatris; today, I found only kind-hearted people; despite the tough conditions, they are extremely hospitable and live simply, though like everyone, they aspire to a better material life.
Why can't the Indian government propose to the Chinese a corridor circumambulating the Holy Mountain where people from both sides could perform the yatra again? It is worth thinking about.
The Shorter Pilgrimage
If India and China do not agree to the Tsari Corridor, another solution is immediately feasible; traditionally, there was a shorter pilgrimage around the Holy Mountain, the Kingkor was organised every year, but the route did not cross the Indian border.
The British intelligence officer, Captain Frederick Bailey, described thus the Kingkor: 'There was also a Small Pilgrimage ... We visited the temples. The largest was Pagmo Lhakang, down in the valley. It had a golden roof, and the principal image, that of Dorje Pagmo was studded with precious stones. A golden butter lamp was set before it.'
A Southern Kingkor, within India's borders, could be organized by the state government with the support of the Indian Army and the Indo-Tibetan Border Police.
In local mythology, many lakes, passes and peaks have a history which could be highlighted; it would open the area to many more Indian visitors and make known to the world the sacredness of these borders areas ... and they could learn from the local tribes the importance to worship the environment.
Claude Arpi is Distinguished Fellow, Centre of Excellence for Himalayan Studies, Shiv Nadar Institution of Eminence (Delhi).
Photographs curated by Manisha Kotian/Rediff.com
Feature Presentation: Aslam Hunani/Rediff.com
© 2025 Rediff.com -