Prime Minister to address election meeting at Arunachal today

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh would be addressing an election meeting at Pasighat today in support of party candidate for October 13^th Poll.

I wonder what would be Beijing's reaction to this visit considering the resentment shown by Beijing when he visited Arunachal the last time.

Was the report by Times Now news channel on Chinese incursion into Arunachal Pradesh farce?

I had never been a fan of Indian private news channel because of their insensible reporting and their dubious distinction of sensationalizing the case to increase their TRP ratings. And when it comes to reporting on North-Eastern states (which is negligible), these news channel has almost made us to believe that the news report would always be far from the truth and would be based on concocted facts to make the viewers believe what they want to project.

Take for example the case of NETV that we reported earlier. The news channel in order to sensationalize the case, reported that National Liberation Front of Taniland (NLFT) is an ‘Apatani’ underground outfit fighting for separate homeland for Apatani Community. That, their headquarter is based at Ziro-the primary dwelling place of Apatani community, which is some 15 kms from China border. The report-all farce and based on concocted facts.

Now, it is turn of yet another news channel, Times Now, who I presume, in their over-zealousness to report on recent Chinese incursion into Indian territory had presented a report based on concocted facts to the viewers.

How do I say that?

Crossing over to China-Is it the case of mass exodus looking for "Greener Pasture" or the case of unintentional crossing over?

Amid fresh word of wars on border disputes between India and China over Arunachal Pradesh, Hindustan Times has reported a very interesting story about mass exodus across border by Arunachalee looking for a "greener pasture".

As political heat between India and China over Arunachal Pradesh ratchets up, the state is also facing the challenging task of stopping border exodus as an increasing number of residents migrate to China and other neighbouring states in search of livelihoods.

Over the years, the Chinese have developed good infrastructure on their side while border areas in India are still backward. Feeling neglected, residents here are looking for “greener pastures” across the border.

With increase in unemployment problem in the state, no doubt there is migration of Arunachalee to other Indian states looking for (better) jobs, but do the people of Arunachal Pradesh (residing at the periphery of the border) indeed migrate across the border to China looking for "greener pasture"? I doubt. Considering the statement of state officials that there is stray incidents of crossing-over to China but no mass exodus, I wonder if it is the case of crossing over the border unknowingly due to unclear demarcation of boundary between India and China? Or is it the case of people moving over to China to visit their relatives residing just across the border? After all, it is said that people of Arunachal Pradesh also do resides just across the border.

Crossing over to China-Is it the case of mass exodus looking for "Greener Pasture" or the case of unintentional crossing over?

Amid fresh word of wars on border disputes between India and China over Arunachal Pradesh, Hindustan Times has reported a very interesting story about mass exodus across border by Arunachalee looking for a "greener pasture".

As political heat between India and China over Arunachal Pradesh ratchets up, the state is also facing the challenging task of stopping border exodus as an increasing number of residents migrate to China and other neighbouring states in search of livelihoods.

Over the years, the Chinese have developed good infrastructure on their side while border areas in India are still backward. Feeling neglected, residents here are looking for “greener pastures” across the border.

With increase in unemployment problem in the state, no doubt there is migration of Arunachalee to other Indian states looking for (better) jobs, but do the people of Arunachal Pradesh (residing at the periphery of the border) indeed migrate across the border to China looking for "greener pasture"? I doubt. Considering the statement of state officials that there is stray incidents of crossing-over to China but no mass exodus, I wonder if it is the case of crossing over the border unknowingly due to unclear demarcation of boundary between India and China? Or is it the case of people moving over to China to visit their relatives residing just across the border? After all, it is said that people of Arunachal Pradesh also do resides just across the border.

Can Rijiju's Chinese Visa be Hailed as 'Positive Change' in Beijing's attitude?

When high profile persons from the state having diplomatic passports were denied visa to visit China on earlier occasions, this BJP parliamentarian from Arunachal Pradesh, Kiren Rijiju has made a glitch less trip to China as a part of 5 members Indian delegates to study how the Olympic organizers has managed the show so that it may benefit the 2010 Commonwealth Games to be staged at New Delhi. This prompt issuance of visa without a hitch has surprised the parliamentarian and made him feel that 'historical breakthrough' has been achieved and issuance of visa by China without any hitch indicated a 'positive' change in Beijing's attitude that could pave the way for resolving the vexed border dispute, particularly over Tawang.

A prompt issuance of visa by China has left BJP MP from Arunachal Pradesh Kiren Rajju "surprised" who said it indicated a "positive" change in Beijing's attitude and could pave the way for resolving the border dispute, particularly over Tawang.

This issuance of visa to an Arunachalee has been hailed by other political parties as well and many has felt that China has softened it's stand on Arunachal.

But can this single instance be considered as 'change in Beijing's attitude' over vexed boundary dispute? Isn't is bit premature to say that Beijing has mellowed down over border dispute? Considering the timing when the visa was issued i.e., Beijing Olympics, I would rather say it is quite premature to hail this single instance as a 'historical breakthrough'. When China was desperately trying to put up 'good boy' image during the Olympics and western media watching over them, would China have risked raking up issue of border dispute at that time by denying a visa to an Indian parliamentarian who was nominated by IOA and was a part of 5 member Indian delegates visiting Beijing for the closing ceremony. I would say no. Had the visa been issued some other time and on some other occasion, then only it could have been considered to be 'positive change' in Beijing's attitude towards resolving the boundary dispute over Arunachal Pradesh. It has to be seen if another high profile Arunachalee gets visa without a hitch to come to think that Beijing has mellowed down over boundary dispute.

It seems obtaining visa to China for a common Arunachalee never had been a problem as otherwise mentioned in the media. The problem arises only when any high profile Arunachalee having Diplomatic passport approaches for visa to China.

Can Rijiju's Chinese Visa be Hailed as 'Positive Change' in Beijing's attitude?

When high profile persons from the state having diplomatic passports were denied visa to visit China on earlier occasions, this BJP parliamentarian from Arunachal Pradesh, Kiren Rijiju has made a glitch less trip to China as a part of 5 members Indian delegates to study how the Olympic organizers has managed the show so that it may benefit the 2010 Commonwealth Games to be staged at New Delhi. This prompt issuance of visa without a hitch has surprised the parliamentarian and made him feel that 'historical breakthrough' has been achieved and issuance of visa by China without any hitch indicated a 'positive' change in Beijing's attitude that could pave the way for resolving the vexed border dispute, particularly over Tawang.

A prompt issuance of visa by China has left BJP MP from Arunachal Pradesh Kiren Rajju "surprised" who said it indicated a "positive" change in Beijing's attitude and could pave the way for resolving the border dispute, particularly over Tawang.

This issuance of visa to an Arunachalee has been hailed by other political parties as well and many has felt that China has softened it's stand on Arunachal.

But can this single instance be considered as 'change in Beijing's attitude' over vexed boundary dispute? Isn't is bit premature to say that Beijing has mellowed down over border dispute? Considering the timing when the visa was issued i.e., Beijing Olympics, I would rather say it is quite premature to hail this single instance as a 'historical breakthrough'. When China was desperately trying to put up 'good boy' image during the Olympics and western media watching over them, would China have risked raking up issue of border dispute at that time by denying a visa to an Indian parliamentarian who was nominated by IOA and was a part of 5 member Indian delegates visiting Beijing for the closing ceremony. I would say no. Had the visa been issued some other time and on some other occasion, then only it could have been considered to be 'positive change' in Beijing's attitude towards resolving the boundary dispute over Arunachal Pradesh. It has to be seen if another high profile Arunachalee gets visa without a hitch to come to think that Beijing has mellowed down over boundary dispute.

It seems obtaining visa to China for a common Arunachalee never had been a problem as otherwise mentioned in the media. The problem arises only when any high profile Arunachalee having Diplomatic passport approaches for visa to China.

Chinese threat to India-Is it for real?

When I came across this post by Ashok Chavda, where he says that he has premonition that second Indo-China war is on anvil, may be after the Beijing Olympics, over the unresolved issue of Arunachal Pradesh; I thought was it possible? No doubt China is using Arunachal Pradesh as one of the pressure card, but with International community watching and China desperately trying put up a ’good boy’ image, would China mount an offensive against India over the unresolved border issue of Arunachal Pradesh? Least chance, I thought, though they would continue to keep this issue unresolved as long as eternity to mount pressure on India.

But this report has made me sit back and wonder.

There are more indications Beijing is making serious preparations to enter the next war between India/Pakistan to enforce China’s claim over Arunachal Pradesh in northeast India. Satellite images studied by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) have revealed launch sites for medium range ballistic missiles in and west of Delingha in north central China. DNA-India report the missiles based there are the DF-21 a medium range ballistic missile of 1,330 miles (2,150 km) China’s first solid fuel rocket and carries a single warhead of 200-300 kilo tons. Hans Kristensen, a researcher with the FAS stated, "From these launch pads for DF-21 missiles, southern Russia and northern India will be within range but not Japan, Taiwan or Guam." It is not Japan, Taiwan, Guam or Russia Beijing has territorial disputes with but India for control over India’s northeast state of Arunachal Pradesh which China invaded for one month in October 1962.

...

The DF-21’s range brings all of Arunachal Pradesh and Indian defenses there within striking distance. Missile launch sites were detected along a 170 mile (275 km) stretch of highway leading from Delingha west through Da Qaidam to Mahai in northern Qinghai province.

Apart from the missile launch sites that targets India and Russia, there is a report of China deploying large number of Jin class submarine at a naval base on Hainan Island near South China sea.

There are clear signals that China is strengthening it arsenal that could pose a long-term threat to India’s security.

Recently, the Indian Navy Chief had expressed concern over the number of nuclear submarines China is acquiring. Admiral Sureesh Mehta said though India is not worried about Beijing building a strategic naval base on the Hainan Island near South China Sea, it is concerned about the numbers.

The Navy had been tracking the developments on the Hainan island for sometime now but the recent reports carried high resolution satellite images of the base. The images showed that China has deployed its new Jin class submarine at the base.

Chinese threat to India-Is it for real?

When I came across this post by Ashok Chavda, where he says that he has premonition that second Indo-China war is on anvil, may be after the Beijing Olympics, over the unresolved issue of Arunachal Pradesh; I thought was it possible? No doubt China is using Arunachal Pradesh as one of the pressure card, but with International community watching and China desperately trying put up a ’good boy’ image, would China mount an offensive against India over the unresolved border issue of Arunachal Pradesh? Least chance, I thought, though they would continue to keep this issue unresolved as long as eternity to mount pressure on India.

But this report has made me sit back and wonder.

There are more indications Beijing is making serious preparations to enter the next war between India/Pakistan to enforce China’s claim over Arunachal Pradesh in northeast India. Satellite images studied by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) have revealed launch sites for medium range ballistic missiles in and west of Delingha in north central China. DNA-India report the missiles based there are the DF-21 a medium range ballistic missile of 1,330 miles (2,150 km) China’s first solid fuel rocket and carries a single warhead of 200-300 kilo tons. Hans Kristensen, a researcher with the FAS stated, "From these launch pads for DF-21 missiles, southern Russia and northern India will be within range but not Japan, Taiwan or Guam." It is not Japan, Taiwan, Guam or Russia Beijing has territorial disputes with but India for control over India’s northeast state of Arunachal Pradesh which China invaded for one month in October 1962.

...

The DF-21’s range brings all of Arunachal Pradesh and Indian defenses there within striking distance. Missile launch sites were detected along a 170 mile (275 km) stretch of highway leading from Delingha west through Da Qaidam to Mahai in northern Qinghai province.

Apart from the missile launch sites that targets India and Russia, there is a report of China deploying large number of Jin class submarine at a naval base on Hainan Island near South China sea.

There are clear signals that China is strengthening it arsenal that could pose a long-term threat to India’s security.

Recently, the Indian Navy Chief had expressed concern over the number of nuclear submarines China is acquiring. Admiral Sureesh Mehta said though India is not worried about Beijing building a strategic naval base on the Hainan Island near South China Sea, it is concerned about the numbers.

The Navy had been tracking the developments on the Hainan island for sometime now but the recent reports carried high resolution satellite images of the base. The images showed that China has deployed its new Jin class submarine at the base.

Does the official Survey of India maps shows Arunachal Pradesh as we know of?

No, says Sify.com report. A large tract of land at Anjaw, Dibang and Lohit districts of Arunachal Pradesh is officially shown as Chinese territory in maps certified by Survey of India.

(Picture taken from Sify.com-Map at top shows the official Arunachal Pradesh map as we know of, with area under review circled and the map below is the map sent by JFR Jacob to GoI)

"A Himalayan Blunder by Indian cartographers has led to a piquant situation along the disputed India-China border, with Indian troops patrolling a region which the official Survey of India maps show as Chinese territory.

Way back in December 1988, this glaring mistake was brought to the notice of the then Minister of External Affairs, P.V.Narasimha Rao, by the 1971 Bangladesh war hero and the former Chief of Staff and Army Commander, Eastern Command, Lt General J F R Jacob.

In his reply to General Jacob dated December 24, 1988, Rao, who later became the Prime Minister of India, accepted "the contradictions that India faced" and admitted that publishing maps with a border that the Chinese might use to their advantage could indeed be a grave issue. "We hope to resolve these in a proper way when we can discuss constructively with the Chinese," he wrote.

However, "the changing of maps at a time when substantive discussions with the Chinese take place also needs to be considered," wrote Rao. Twenty years later, the incorrect maps remain unchanged."

Now I wonder, two decades hence, the error in the map remains still uncorrected (let me know if corrected), is the government serious about solving the boundary row with China?

Does the official Survey of India maps shows Arunachal Pradesh as we know of?

No, says Sify.com report. A large tract of land at Anjaw, Dibang and Lohit districts of Arunachal Pradesh is officially shown as Chinese territory in maps certified by Survey of India.

(Picture taken from Sify.com-Map at top shows the official Arunachal Pradesh map as we know of, with area under review circled and the map below is the map sent by JFR Jacob to GoI)

"A Himalayan Blunder by Indian cartographers has led to a piquant situation along the disputed India-China border, with Indian troops patrolling a region which the official Survey of India maps show as Chinese territory.

Way back in December 1988, this glaring mistake was brought to the notice of the then Minister of External Affairs, P.V.Narasimha Rao, by the 1971 Bangladesh war hero and the former Chief of Staff and Army Commander, Eastern Command, Lt General J F R Jacob.

In his reply to General Jacob dated December 24, 1988, Rao, who later became the Prime Minister of India, accepted "the contradictions that India faced" and admitted that publishing maps with a border that the Chinese might use to their advantage could indeed be a grave issue. "We hope to resolve these in a proper way when we can discuss constructively with the Chinese," he wrote.

However, "the changing of maps at a time when substantive discussions with the Chinese take place also needs to be considered," wrote Rao. Twenty years later, the incorrect maps remain unchanged."

Now I wonder, two decades hence, the error in the map remains still uncorrected (let me know if corrected), is the government serious about solving the boundary row with China?

Chinese Visa to an Arunachalee-Was it a History in making or a case of hogging the Limelight?

It was on 25th November, 2007. A history was in the making-a history of getting Chinese Visa by an Arunachalee. The applicant was frantically waiting for his visa to be cleared with his finger's crossed, whether his visa would be cleared or not-he being an Arunachalee, at a Coffee Shop of Samrat Hotel and at the eleventh hour his visa got cleared by the Chinese Embassy, finally after initial hesitation. He rushed to the IGI airport with loose visa sheet attached to his passport (no. 1503076) and boarded the fight to China amidst raised eyebrows from officials at airport on how on earth an Arunachalee got visa to China. So they say history was created. Well, that's how the media portrayed it.

The news about this China visit by an Arunachalee was broke by the Head of the Department of the Institution where this Arunachalee worked as a lecturer and all the hell broke loose.

The Vice Chancellor of the University, accused the lecturer of using fraudulent means to get his visa to China, thereby maligning the name of the institution, the state whom he represented and the country as a whole and promised a disciplinary action against him when he returned and issued a memo to HoD for issuing a press release without his knowledge and without University's consent.

But in a dramatic move, all of a sudden, VC Prof. K.C. Belliappa made a 'U' turn and retracted his earlier statement saying that the 'actual factual fact' to obtain the visa to China by his colleague has been ascertained and that he (Marpe Sora) didn't gave false affidavit while applying for the visa.

"I have now ascertained the actual factual facts with the return of Sora to the campus. In the affidavit, Sora has testified that he is an Arunachalee by birth and that he is teaching in Rajiv Gandhi University, Prof. Belliappa said.

The address at Guwahati mentioned in the affidavit is where Sora's brother-in-law lives. Sora was a resident in that house while he was pursuing his M. Tech course in Tezpur University, Assam. Hence, all the three statement made by Sora in the affidavit are factually correct and there is no iota of falsehood in the affidavit."

Now, one wonders, why Prof. Beliappa made this sudden 'U' turn in his statement after vouching to take stern disciplinary action for using fraudulent means in his earlier statement? Being a VC of premier institute, shouldn't he have verified the fact prior to issuing any press statement instead of retracting later? Or was it the case of 'why should I be left behind when others (read HoD) are hogging the limelight of this historical event'? Or was it that New Delhi had asked the VC to do so i.e., to retract his statement (VC stated that he was getting lot's of phone calls in the wake of his statement in the press about the 'false affidavit')? But then, why would New Delhi like to do so? Hmm..sounds rational.

If the VC retracted his statement at the behest of New Delhi, the only sensible reasoning that I can arrive at is-in order to reassure that New Delhi is keen to solve the Boundary problem and they have made significant achievement through diplomatic talks, to the people of Arunachal, which has, off late become quite vocal about the Indian government's stand on Arunachal vis-à-vis Indo-China boundary row over Arunachal, the statement of VC had to be changed, who was hell bent on proving (stated that he had documentary proof) that Marpe Sora got visa not as an Arunachalee but as a resident of Assam, in which case all the hailing of positive shift in Chinese diplomacy towards the vexed boundary dispute would all  go down the drain.

Now that VC has corroborated the 'factual facts' (at whose behest or for whatever reasons) and stated that Marpe Sora had clearly stated that he was an Arunachalee by birth in his affidavit, should we say history was made by Marpe Sora becoming first Arunachalee to visit China on Chinese visa? No, if we go by the claims pouring in. In a Letter to the Editor that appeared in The Arunachal Times dated December 12, one Vishal P Nabam has claimed to have visited China on 90 days visa from Chinese Embassy, New Delhi during the month of October 2006 and that he knows several other Arunachalees who have visited China before him and that all the media hailing Marpe Sora as the first Arunachalee to visit China is 'absurd and misguiding'.

"I would like to make a statement before your esteemed readers and the people of Arunachal Pradesh that I do not accept at all that Marpe Sora is the first Arunachal born citizen to obtain visa to visit China because I had visited China in October, 2006 by duly obtaining a 90 days visa from the Chinese Embassy, New Delhi. I reached Beijing on October 4, 2006 and stayed at Jillin, Changchun province, China for 7 days. I climbed the Great Wall of China on October 11, 2006 and obtained the Hero Card. I have seen Mao Testung Square, World Trade Center (WTC) and many other historical places.

I am not giving a counter claim that I am the first one to visit China but I would like to simply tell that I know that there are many Arunachalees who had visited China before me."

-Vishal P Nabam

I was wondering, why now? Why he didn't come out with this information earlier? Was it that he couldn't take the media attention that a fellow Arunachalee was getting for being the first Arunachalee to visit China and that he needed to share the limelight?

Whether History was set or not, whether all the media statements and claims made for hogging the limelight or not- but this entire event has made one thing clear that an Arunachalee like any other Indians are granted visa to visit China until and unless he/she is on an Indian Government Sponsored Programme.

Related Reading:
Chinese Visa to an Arunachalee-A Positive Diplomatic stance or a Slip Up?

Chinese Visa to an Arunachalee-Was it a History in making or a case of hogging the Limelight?

It was on 25th November, 2007. A history was in the making-a history of getting Chinese Visa by an Arunachalee. The applicant was frantically waiting for his visa to be cleared with his finger's crossed, whether his visa would be cleared or not-he being an Arunachalee, at a Coffee Shop of Samrat Hotel and at the eleventh hour his visa got cleared by the Chinese Embassy, finally after initial hesitation. He rushed to the IGI airport with loose visa sheet attached to his passport (no. 1503076) and boarded the fight to China amidst raised eyebrows from officials at airport on how on earth an Arunachalee got visa to China. So they say history was created. Well, that's how the media portrayed it.

The news about this China visit by an Arunachalee was broke by the Head of the Department of the Institution where this Arunachalee worked as a lecturer and all the hell broke loose.

The Vice Chancellor of the University, accused the lecturer of using fraudulent means to get his visa to China, thereby maligning the name of the institution, the state whom he represented and the country as a whole and promised a disciplinary action against him when he returned and issued a memo to HoD for issuing a press release without his knowledge and without University's consent.

But in a dramatic move, all of a sudden, VC Prof. K.C. Belliappa made a 'U' turn and retracted his earlier statement saying that the 'actual factual fact' to obtain the visa to China by his colleague has been ascertained and that he (Marpe Sora) didn't gave false affidavit while applying for the visa.

"I have now ascertained the actual factual facts with the return of Sora to the campus. In the affidavit, Sora has testified that he is an Arunachalee by birth and that he is teaching in Rajiv Gandhi University, Prof. Belliappa said.

The address at Guwahati mentioned in the affidavit is where Sora's brother-in-law lives. Sora was a resident in that house while he was pursuing his M. Tech course in Tezpur University, Assam. Hence, all the three statement made by Sora in the affidavit are factually correct and there is no iota of falsehood in the affidavit."

Now, one wonders, why Prof. Beliappa made this sudden 'U' turn in his statement after vouching to take stern disciplinary action for using fraudulent means in his earlier statement? Being a VC of premier institute, shouldn't he have verified the fact prior to issuing any press statement instead of retracting later? Or was it the case of 'why should I be left behind when others (read HoD) are hogging the limelight of this historical event'? Or was it that New Delhi had asked the VC to do so i.e., to retract his statement (VC stated that he was getting lot's of phone calls in the wake of his statement in the press about the 'false affidavit')? But then, why would New Delhi like to do so? Hmm..sounds rational.

If the VC retracted his statement at the behest of New Delhi, the only sensible reasoning that I can arrive at is-in order to reassure that New Delhi is keen to solve the Boundary problem and they have made significant achievement through diplomatic talks, to the people of Arunachal, which has, off late become quite vocal about the Indian government's stand on Arunachal vis-à-vis Indo-China boundary row over Arunachal, the statement of VC had to be changed, who was hell bent on proving (stated that he had documentary proof) that Marpe Sora got visa not as an Arunachalee but as a resident of Assam, in which case all the hailing of positive shift in Chinese diplomacy towards the vexed boundary dispute would all  go down the drain.

Now that VC has corroborated the 'factual facts' (at whose behest or for whatever reasons) and stated that Marpe Sora had clearly stated that he was an Arunachalee by birth in his affidavit, should we say history was made by Marpe Sora becoming first Arunachalee to visit China on Chinese visa? No, if we go by the claims pouring in. In a Letter to the Editor that appeared in The Arunachal Times dated December 12, one Vishal P Nabam has claimed to have visited China on 90 days visa from Chinese Embassy, New Delhi during the month of October 2006 and that he knows several other Arunachalees who have visited China before him and that all the media hailing Marpe Sora as the first Arunachalee to visit China is 'absurd and misguiding'.

"I would like to make a statement before your esteemed readers and the people of Arunachal Pradesh that I do not accept at all that Marpe Sora is the first Arunachal born citizen to obtain visa to visit China because I had visited China in October, 2006 by duly obtaining a 90 days visa from the Chinese Embassy, New Delhi. I reached Beijing on October 4, 2006 and stayed at Jillin, Changchun province, China for 7 days. I climbed the Great Wall of China on October 11, 2006 and obtained the Hero Card. I have seen Mao Testung Square, World Trade Center (WTC) and many other historical places.

I am not giving a counter claim that I am the first one to visit China but I would like to simply tell that I know that there are many Arunachalees who had visited China before me."

-Vishal P Nabam

I was wondering, why now? Why he didn't come out with this information earlier? Was it that he couldn't take the media attention that a fellow Arunachalee was getting for being the first Arunachalee to visit China and that he needed to share the limelight?

Whether History was set or not, whether all the media statements and claims made for hogging the limelight or not- but this entire event has made one thing clear that an Arunachalee like any other Indians are granted visa to visit China until and unless he/she is on an Indian Government Sponsored Programme.

Related Reading:
Chinese Visa to an Arunachalee-A Positive Diplomatic stance or a Slip Up?

Conventional v/s Digital Way

Last night I was going through the back issues of now discontinued ZIRO MIRROR, when I came across the cartoon that I did for the 5^th issue of that fortnightly.

It was done in a zippy in flat 15 mins time as the issue was ready at press, about to roll but hold back for want of cover page. Introspecting, I thought, how it would have looked and how much time it would have taken had I gone the digital way. So, I sat on my computer and with the help of Adobe Illustrator 9.0, I managed to come up with this with caption and all (see below) and guess what, it took me whopping 6 hours to redo that cartoon the digital way. Quite a time you would say-I agree and it reminded me that I have lots to brush up my knowledge on Illustrator. For instance, how to apply hatch so as to give that pen and ink look. :)

Conventional v/s Digital Way

Last night I was going through the back issues of now discontinued ZIRO MIRROR, when I came across the cartoon that I did for the 5^th issue of that fortnightly.

It was done in a zippy in flat 15 mins time as the issue was ready at press, about to roll but hold back for want of cover page. Introspecting, I thought, how it would have looked and how much time it would have taken had I gone the digital way. So, I sat on my computer and with the help of Adobe Illustrator 9.0, I managed to come up with this with caption and all (see below) and guess what, it took me whopping 6 hours to redo that cartoon the digital way. Quite a time you would say-I agree and it reminded me that I have lots to brush up my knowledge on Illustrator. For instance, how to apply hatch so as to give that pen and ink look. :)

Chinese Visa to an Arunachalee-A Positive Diplomatic Stance or a Slip Up?

When Arunachalee’s had been denied visa to China on several occasions earlier, it came as a surprise to me when an Arunachalee, teaching Computer Science at Rajiv Gandhi University, Doimukh, Arunachal Pradesh was granted visa to visit China on a 2-week long academic tour organized by India China Alliance Center of CII. The local and national media hailed this a positive diplomatic stance of China towards solving the vexed Indo-China border row over Arunachal. I was not quite convinced with the media about this positive change in Chinese diplomacy, though. When China has been strongly voicing their assertion over Arunachal and denying visa to an Arunachalee saying that one does not need a visa to visit it’s own country (I should say, a very clever stance taken by the Chinese to assert their territorial claim), I wondered, how could China change it’s stance over Arunachal overnight? Am I being skeptical? Or is it that the marathon talks by Special Representatives on Boundary issue has bore fruit and has mellowed down the Chinese to change it’s stance on Arunachal? But then, what about the reports of incursions by Chinese army deep inside Arunachal of which the union government says is the difference in perception of LAC (Line of Actual Control)?

Everything didn’t seem quite falling into place until the report of disciplinary action against Marpe Sora-the lone Arunachalee to get Chinese Visa and memo to Dr. Sikhar Kumar Sharma, Head of Department of Computer Science and Engineering of Rajiv Gandhi University appeared in the local daily.

Apparently, for obtaining Chinese Visa, the lecturer from Arunachal University had retorted to fraudulent means by producing false affidavit before the CEO of India China Alliance Center, stating that he had been permanent resident of Guwahati for the last ten years and Piyush Bahl, Chief Executive Officer, India China Alliance Center had made a special request to the Chinese embassy in New Delhi to grant Visa to Sora vouching that he is cent percent permanent resident of state of Assam. The Chinese Embassy, after initial hesitation, as ‘affidavit’ declared Sora as born Arunachalee, finally cleared his visa to China for academic tour.

“Armed with documents, the VC (Vice Chancellor, RGU) revealed that Sora produced a “false” affidavit before the CEO of India China Alliance Center, giving “false address” that he was permanent resident of Assam’s Guwahati where he was residing for last ten years, to get the Chinese visa, whereas Sora, a native of Nari under Tellam in East Siang District is presently residing in Maharlagun and working with the RGU in Arunachal itself since September 7, 2005.

RGU Department of Computer Science and Engineering lecturer Marpe Sora had obtained the Chinese Visa through fraudulent method, the Vice Chancellor informed.

Piyush Bahl made a special request to the Chinese embassy in Delhi to issue a Visa to Sora communicating that he is a lecturer of a prestigious Central University and was keen to join his first ever educational tour to China. He further vouched that Sora was cent percent permanent resident of the state of Assam.”

-The Arunachal Times

So, it was a case of 'slip-up' on account of visa issuing authority due to misinformed place of residence and not a 'positive-shift' in China's Diplomacy as was hailed, afterall. This China-sojourn by the local only brought himself disciplinary action by his authority for using 'false affidavit' to obtain visa and a memo to his Head of Department for issuing press release about his visit to China in local media without prior consent and approval of the University. How sad! And we thought this vexed border dispute is nearing end with China recognising Arunachal a part of India by granting visa to an indigenous Arunachalee. :(

Chinese Visa to an Arunachalee-A Positive Diplomatic Stance or a Slip Up?

When Arunachalee’s had been denied visa to China on several occasions earlier, it came as a surprise to me when an Arunachalee, teaching Computer Science at Rajiv Gandhi University, Doimukh, Arunachal Pradesh was granted visa to visit China on a 2-week long academic tour organized by India China Alliance Center of CII. The local and national media hailed this a positive diplomatic stance of China towards solving the vexed Indo-China border row over Arunachal. I was not quite convinced with the media about this positive change in Chinese diplomacy, though. When China has been strongly voicing their assertion over Arunachal and denying visa to an Arunachalee saying that one does not need a visa to visit it’s own country (I should say, a very clever stance taken by the Chinese to assert their territorial claim), I wondered, how could China change it’s stance over Arunachal overnight? Am I being skeptical? Or is it that the marathon talks by Special Representatives on Boundary issue has bore fruit and has mellowed down the Chinese to change it’s stance on Arunachal? But then, what about the reports of incursions by Chinese army deep inside Arunachal of which the union government says is the difference in perception of LAC (Line of Actual Control)?

Everything didn’t seem quite falling into place until the report of disciplinary action against Marpe Sora-the lone Arunachalee to get Chinese Visa and memo to Dr. Sikhar Kumar Sharma, Head of Department of Computer Science and Engineering of Rajiv Gandhi University appeared in the local daily.

Apparently, for obtaining Chinese Visa, the lecturer from Arunachal University had retorted to fraudulent means by producing false affidavit before the CEO of India China Alliance Center, stating that he had been permanent resident of Guwahati for the last ten years and Piyush Bahl, Chief Executive Officer, India China Alliance Center had made a special request to the Chinese embassy in New Delhi to grant Visa to Sora vouching that he is cent percent permanent resident of state of Assam. The Chinese Embassy, after initial hesitation, as ‘affidavit’ declared Sora as born Arunachalee, finally cleared his visa to China for academic tour.

“Armed with documents, the VC (Vice Chancellor, RGU) revealed that Sora produced a “false” affidavit before the CEO of India China Alliance Center, giving “false address” that he was permanent resident of Assam’s Guwahati where he was residing for last ten years, to get the Chinese visa, whereas Sora, a native of Nari under Tellam in East Siang District is presently residing in Maharlagun and working with the RGU in Arunachal itself since September 7, 2005.

RGU Department of Computer Science and Engineering lecturer Marpe Sora had obtained the Chinese Visa through fraudulent method, the Vice Chancellor informed.

Piyush Bahl made a special request to the Chinese embassy in Delhi to issue a Visa to Sora communicating that he is a lecturer of a prestigious Central University and was keen to join his first ever educational tour to China. He further vouched that Sora was cent percent permanent resident of the state of Assam.”

-The Arunachal Times

So, it was a case of 'slip-up' on account of visa issuing authority due to misinformed place of residence and not a 'positive-shift' in China's Diplomacy as was hailed, afterall. This China-sojourn by the local only brought himself disciplinary action by his authority for using 'false affidavit' to obtain visa and a memo to his Head of Department for issuing press release about his visit to China in local media without prior consent and approval of the University. How sad! And we thought this vexed border dispute is nearing end with China recognising Arunachal a part of India by granting visa to an indigenous Arunachalee. :(

Time to learn Chinese, eh!

Quite sometimes back, I heard that Arunachal University, now Rajiv Gandhi University, is contemplating introducing Chinese language among other languages in its language department (though right now they are offering English and Hindi only) and I wondered there and then, is it because if in the eventuality of Arunachal Pradesh being negotiated over to China, it would be necessary for the people of Arunachal to atleast know the basics of Chinese. But now, I guess, I know why? It is because the people are left with little choice but to learn Chinese if they want to remain updated with the latest happenings in and around the world or to entertain themselves if they are at the vicinity of Indo-China border as China has jammed signals of AIR and Doordarshan, forget any private news channel and the only available signal is of China Radio International.

Guess folks, it’s time to learn Chinese now.

WHAT’S THE COST OF ARUNACHAL?

-by Roto Chobin

A game of ping-pong has been playing between India and China since the first half of 20th century, in which the state of Arunachal is being used as a ball. The British, being a judge to this game, made a mess by crushing the ball and rushed out of this game in haste, leaving behind two ambivalent countries to play with deformed ball. The so-called border talks are being held at the expense of Arunachal. The debate on border issue seems incredibly long and the outcome is not on the horizon. And if today the Arunachal is being treated as a whore, the British and Tibetan must share a part of blame. The Tibetan, who had some sway over certain part, didn’t took care of the maiden, the British broke its virginity and passed it to India, and then the India kept the state like a mistress and now China wants to have it.

Let’s take a look at the historical records to unravel if Arunachal really were a territory of China or an integral part of India. The starting place of border dispute extends back into the 19th Century, when both China and British India asserted claims to remote mountain areas between China and India. But the people of Arunachal unknown to the doom, existed as a sovereign state. In the second half of the nineteenth century, the tide of development was lapping into the foot-hills. So the British drew a line along the foot of the hills which was to be called the “Inner Line” and the “Outer Line” under the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation of 1873. The Inner Line was an administrative line, in the Assam tribal areas, to keep hunters and traders out of the Assam tribal areas; no taxes were collected beyond the Inner Line. The Outer Line was the international boundary of British India. However, little publicity was given to the demarcation of the Outer Line. On March 30, 1911, Noel Williamson, Assistant Political Officer of Sadiya, and a tea estate doctor were attacked and killed by Adi tribesmen in Komsing. Williamson was formally warned not to cross the Inner Line without expressed permission. Williamson's death provided for the revision of the tribal policy for which Williamson himself had argued for years. A British expedition, headed by Major General Hamilton Bower, was mounted in late 1911; the mission continued until 1913. The alleged purpose of the expedition was punitive; indeed, the Adis were punished for slaying Williamson. However, the ultimate objective of the expedition was to define a new border and to inform the Chinese of the new limits of British sovereignty. While the British were exploring Assam, the 1911 Chinese Revolution erupted. By 1912, Chinese influence in Tibet had fallen drastically. As Chinese power in Tibet waned, Chinese pressure on the Assam border ceased to exist. The British now endeavored to secure the Assam Himalayas from any future Chinese intervention.

The fall of Chinese power in Tibet led to negotiations between British Indian, Chinese, and Tibetan delegates to the Simla Conference of 1913-14. The British had decided to make Tibet a genuine buffer state. The British chief delegate, Sir Henry McMahon, introduced the idea of a second buffer into the long Sino-Tibetan debates over the boundary between Chinese control and the Tibetan buffer. The Chinese government immediately repudiated the agreement. The Chinese rejection was a blow to McMahon's buffer scheme. However, McMahon had meanwhile negotiated another buffer and zone of defense for the Himalayas. He had made a separate agreement with the chief Tibetan delegate; this agreement defined the frontier line along the crest of the Assam Himalayas, based on the 1911-13 Abor Expedition. The line was marked on a large-scale (eight miles to the inch) map; however, this map and the details of the McMahon-Tibetan agreement were not communicated to the Chinese. The task of making good the McMahon Line was given to J.P.Mills, the government’s adviser on tribal affairs, who was to say that: “the tribes to be incorporated (in India) belong naturally more to Tibet than to India. In race and in language they are mongoloid. They all speak Tibeto-Burmese languages which have nothing in common with the Assamesse of the Aryans of the plains. It follows therefore that what one might call the cultural and social pull is towards Tibet …. The McMahon Line therefore suffers from the disability that though it may look well on the map … it is in fact not the natural boundary, whereas the frontier along the plains is the natural one.” The Indian government also recognized that the population along the north-east frontier was ethnically and culturally closer to Tibet than to India, but due to the strategic and geopolitical considerations that had formed Britain’s approach to the north-east border applied with equal force for the new (Indian) government. One of the last acts of the Chinese nationalist ambassador in New Delhi was to remind the Indian government in February 1947 that china did not recognize the McMahon Line, and held the simla convention invalid.

In the early1950s, a strong Assam Rifles patrol moving up the Subansiri River was warmly welcomed by one of the tribes, feasted and given shelter - and then massacred almost to a man. Under Nehru’s order, no punitive action had been taken. In 1952, G.S. Bajpai, then the governor of Bombay urges that India should take the initiative in raising the question of McMahon Line with the Chinese government, only to be told by K.M.Panikkar that the Prime Minister (Nehru) had decided that it was not in India’s interest to raise the question of the McMahon Line. By 1958, the Indians had completed the work left unfinished by the British and made good the McMahon Line. In December 26th 1959, the china implied that the Indian maps are ‘cutting deep into Chinese territory’ in the western sector, while of the eastern sector it is said that ‘the whole boundary line is pushed northward, including an area of about 90,000 sq km which originally belonged to China. In 1986, differences raise again over the McMahon line in the Sumdorung Chu area of Arunachal. After Rajiv Gandhi’s visit to china in 1988, a Joint Working Group (JWG) forum was formed to find a real solution to boundary problems and thence, the delegates from both side debated on this issue from time to time. Ironically, the JWG forum has focused more on peace along the border than on a real solution to the boundary problem. And so far umpteen JWG meeting was conducted without making much headway, and so far not even a single representative of Arunachal was invited to participate in the border talk.

The natives of Arunachal not only resisted Indian occupation when Indian officials moved into inner line, but were equally intimidated by Chinese troops when they entered in Arunachal during 1962 war. The peoples of this region never had a direct contact with China nor with India which makes the state more or less a sovereign state. But from the day Arunachal Pradesh was lifted up into the category of ‘Indian states’ from Union Territory in 1986, she has worked diligently with Indian constitution. And in these 60 years, from the Independence Day till today, the development of infrastructure is not worth mentioning which leads to grave doubt that India’s incapability to develop physical infrastructure in Arunachal lays in the reason that India cannot hold on to Arunachal for a long time. On the contrary, the Chinese has developed Tibet beyond recognition, even laid a rail tracks up to Lhasa which is situated 3
,600 meters above sea level, and which, I anticipate, will bind Tibet more close to the mainland. Apart from development of infrastructure issue; if we analyze the statement made by External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee during his visit to Chandigarh last year and in a recent parliament session- 1. “Some adjustments will take place here and there on Arunachal Pradesh and J&K at the conclusion of the ongoing talks with China and Pakistan respectively.” 2. “India and china are exploring the framework of a final package settlement covering all sectors of the India-China boundary (May 10, 2007 Arunachal Times),” it corroborate the doubts enormously. On the other hand, China left no stone unturned to remind the people of Arunachal that they are Chinese citizen. For instance, lately, Chinese embassy refused to grant visa to an IAS officer, Ganesh Koyu who hails from Arunachal, because he comes from a disputed area and which didn’t come as a shock to me as this kind of denial had happened in late 1990’s to then the chief minister, Gegong Apang, when he sought a visa to visit China but was told by Chinese embassy that he doesn’t need a visa to visit his own country.

However, most of the people of Arunachal are of the opinion that the Arunachal would do better under Indian constitution. But the question still refused to subdue is: does the Indian Government and Indians are ready to assimilate the state within its republic. The ‘flip-flop’ attitude of federal government and their vague opinion on Arunachal not only perplex us but also steer us into dark alley. Besides, We (Arunachal along with Mizoram and Nagaland) were accused of being a parasite state by substantial section of the populations that claims that we survives on the flesh of Indians who allegedly labours night and day at IT industry et al to make Indian economy bullish. And we have been blamed for the lack of infrastructure in their state, for the potholes, etc. as well because their money has been pumped into these three states. Perhaps, they may be right in pointing out this. And if this view is defended by Indian government and Indians, then the privilege to call Arunachal an integral part of India is wholly invalid. And the Arunachal should have been given back their earlier status of sovereign state. Furthermore, the Indians are not happy with reservation (reservation in job and educational institution for scheduled tribe and caste), and we (the youth who have been to metropolis and influenced by it) are not happy about being ‘scheduled’ tribe (ST) for so long and to be called ST makes us a part of highly caste ridden and feudal society of Aryans.

At long last, considering the dealings of the centre with our state, it does indicate that the federal government of India, who is directly responsible for corrupting our state government by fattening the wallets of our politician and their enforcement arm, will never be able to oversee our state efficiently. The failure of Indian government to administer competently must not suggest that the whole of Arunachal is for bargain. And the Arunachal and its people shouldn’t be used as pawn in order to strengthen the bilateral ties between India and China. The talk show of two giant goliaths must go on and, but, let the Arunachal be a buffer state - free from Indian and Chinese influence.

WHAT’S THE COST OF ARUNACHAL?

-by Roto Chobin

A game of ping-pong has been playing between India and China since the first half of 20th century, in which the state of Arunachal is being used as a ball. The British, being a judge to this game, made a mess by crushing the ball and rushed out of this game in haste, leaving behind two ambivalent countries to play with deformed ball. The so-called border talks are being held at the expense of Arunachal. The debate on border issue seems incredibly long and the outcome is not on the horizon. And if today the Arunachal is being treated as a whore, the British and Tibetan must share a part of blame. The Tibetan, who had some sway over certain part, didn’t took care of the maiden, the British broke its virginity and passed it to India, and then the India kept the state like a mistress and now China wants to have it.

Let’s take a look at the historical records to unravel if Arunachal really were a territory of China or an integral part of India. The starting place of border dispute extends back into the 19th Century, when both China and British India asserted claims to remote mountain areas between China and India. But the people of Arunachal unknown to the doom, existed as a sovereign state. In the second half of the nineteenth century, the tide of development was lapping into the foot-hills. So the British drew a line along the foot of the hills which was to be called the “Inner Line” and the “Outer Line” under the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation of 1873. The Inner Line was an administrative line, in the Assam tribal areas, to keep hunters and traders out of the Assam tribal areas; no taxes were collected beyond the Inner Line. The Outer Line was the international boundary of British India. However, little publicity was given to the demarcation of the Outer Line. On March 30, 1911, Noel Williamson, Assistant Political Officer of Sadiya, and a tea estate doctor were attacked and killed by Adi tribesmen in Komsing. Williamson was formally warned not to cross the Inner Line without expressed permission. Williamson's death provided for the revision of the tribal policy for which Williamson himself had argued for years. A British expedition, headed by Major General Hamilton Bower, was mounted in late 1911; the mission continued until 1913. The alleged purpose of the expedition was punitive; indeed, the Adis were punished for slaying Williamson. However, the ultimate objective of the expedition was to define a new border and to inform the Chinese of the new limits of British sovereignty. While the British were exploring Assam, the 1911 Chinese Revolution erupted. By 1912, Chinese influence in Tibet had fallen drastically. As Chinese power in Tibet waned, Chinese pressure on the Assam border ceased to exist. The British now endeavored to secure the Assam Himalayas from any future Chinese intervention.

The fall of Chinese power in Tibet led to negotiations between British Indian, Chinese, and Tibetan delegates to the Simla Conference of 1913-14. The British had decided to make Tibet a genuine buffer state. The British chief delegate, Sir Henry McMahon, introduced the idea of a second buffer into the long Sino-Tibetan debates over the boundary between Chinese control and the Tibetan buffer. The Chinese government immediately repudiated the agreement. The Chinese rejection was a blow to McMahon's buffer scheme. However, McMahon had meanwhile negotiated another buffer and zone of defense for the Himalayas. He had made a separate agreement with the chief Tibetan delegate; this agreement defined the frontier line along the crest of the Assam Himalayas, based on the 1911-13 Abor Expedition. The line was marked on a large-scale (eight miles to the inch) map; however, this map and the details of the McMahon-Tibetan agreement were not communicated to the Chinese. The task of making good the McMahon Line was given to J.P.Mills, the government’s adviser on tribal affairs, who was to say that: “the tribes to be incorporated (in India) belong naturally more to Tibet than to India. In race and in language they are mongoloid. They all speak Tibeto-Burmese languages which have nothing in common with the Assamesse of the Aryans of the plains. It follows therefore that what one might call the cultural and social pull is towards Tibet …. The McMahon Line therefore suffers from the disability that though it may look well on the map … it is in fact not the natural boundary, whereas the frontier along the plains is the natural one.” The Indian government also recognized that the population along the north-east frontier was ethnically and culturally closer to Tibet than to India, but due to the strategic and geopolitical considerations that had formed Britain’s approach to the north-east border applied with equal force for the new (Indian) government. One of the last acts of the Chinese nationalist ambassador in New Delhi was to remind the Indian government in February 1947 that china did not recognize the McMahon Line, and held the simla convention invalid.

In the early1950s, a strong Assam Rifles patrol moving up the Subansiri River was warmly welcomed by one of the tribes, feasted and given shelter - and then massacred almost to a man. Under Nehru’s order, no punitive action had been taken. In 1952, G.S. Bajpai, then the governor of Bombay urges that India should take the initiative in raising the question of McMahon Line with the Chinese government, only to be told by K.M.Panikkar that the Prime Minister (Nehru) had decided that it was not in India’s interest to raise the question of the McMahon Line. By 1958, the Indians had completed the work left unfinished by the British and made good the McMahon Line. In December 26th 1959, the china implied that the Indian maps are ‘cutting deep into Chinese territory’ in the western sector, while of the eastern sector it is said that ‘the whole boundary line is pushed northward, including an area of about 90,000 sq km which originally belonged to China. In 1986, differences raise again over the McMahon line in the Sumdorung Chu area of Arunachal. After Rajiv Gandhi’s visit to china in 1988, a Joint Working Group (JWG) forum was formed to find a real solution to boundary problems and thence, the delegates from both side debated on this issue from time to time. Ironically, the JWG forum has focused more on peace along the border than on a real solution to the boundary problem. And so far umpteen JWG meeting was conducted without making much headway, and so far not even a single representative of Arunachal was invited to participate in the border talk.

The natives of Arunachal not only resisted Indian occupation when Indian officials moved into inner line, but were equally intimidated by Chinese troops when they entered in Arunachal during 1962 war. The peoples of this region never had a direct contact with China nor with India which makes the state more or less a sovereign state. But from the day Arunachal Pradesh was lifted up into the category of ‘Indian states’ from Union Territory in 1986, she has worked diligently with Indian constitution. And in these 60 years, from the Independence Day till today, the development of infrastructure is not worth mentioning which leads to grave doubt that India’s incapability to develop physical infrastructure in Arunachal lays in the reason that India cannot hold on to Arunachal for a long time. On the contrary, the Chinese has developed Tibet beyond recognition, even laid a rail tracks up to Lhasa which is situated 3,600 meters above sea level, and which, I anticipate, will bind Tibet more close to the mainland. Apart from development of infrastructure issue; if we analyze the statement made by External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee during his visit to Chandigarh last year and in a recent parliament session- 1. “Some adjustments will take place here and there on Arunachal Pradesh and J&K at the conclusion of the ongoing talks with China and Pakistan respectively.” 2. “India and china are exploring the framework of a final package settlement covering all sectors of the India-China boundary (May 10, 2007 Arunachal Times),” it corroborate the doubts enormously. On the other hand, China left no stone unturned to remind the people of Arunachal that they are Chinese citizen. For instance, lately, Chinese embassy refused to grant visa to an IAS officer, Ganesh Koyu who hails from Arunachal, because he comes from a disputed area and which didn’t come as a shock to me as this kind of denial had happened in late 1990’s to then the chief minister, Gegong Apang, when he sought a visa to visit China but was told by Chinese embassy that he doesn’t need a visa to visit his own country.

However, most of the people of Arunachal are of the opinion that the Arunachal would do better under Indian constitution. But the question still refused to subdue is: does the Indian Government and Indians are ready to assimilate the state within its republic. The ‘flip-flop’ attitude of federal government and their vague opinion on Arunachal not only perplex us but also steer us into dark alley. Besides, We (Arunachal along with Mizoram and Nagaland) were accused of being a parasite state by substantial section of the populations that claims that we survives on the flesh of Indians who allegedly labours night and day at IT industry et al to make Indian economy bullish. And we have been blamed for the lack of infrastructure in their state, for the potholes, etc. as well because their money has been pumped into these three states. Perhaps, they may be right in pointing out this. And if this view is defended by Indian government and Indians, then the privilege to call Arunachal an integral part of India is wholly invalid. And the Arunachal should have been given back their earlier status of sovereign state. Furthermore, the Indians are not happy with reservation (reservation in job and educational institution for scheduled tribe and caste), and we (the youth who have been to metropolis and influenced by it) are not happy about being ‘scheduled’ tribe (ST) for so long and to be called ST makes us a part of highly caste ridden and feudal society of Aryans.

At long last, considering the dealings of the centre with our state, it does indicate that the federal government of India, who is directly responsible for corrupting our state government by fattening the wallets of our politician and their enforcement arm, will never be able to oversee our state efficiently. The failure of Indian government to administer competently must not suggest that the whole of Arunachal is for bargain. And the Arunachal and its people shouldn’t be used as pawn in order to strengthen the bilateral ties between India and China. The talk show of two giant goliaths must go on and, but, let the Arunachal be a buffer state - free from Indian and Chinese influence.

Are the people of Arunachal turning away from New Delhi?

If Arunachalee parliamentarian Kiren Rijiju is to be believed, then the Arunachalee people are turning away from New Delhi and it wouldn't be far when separatist movement would gain control over this most peaceful state of the country. The Asian Age reports-

"BJP MP from Arunachal Pradesh Khiren Rijiju on Thursday claimed separatists were gaining ground and garnering support of the local people in the region as New Delhi was maintaining a "conspicuous silence" on China’s repeated claim on the state.

"The situation in Arunachal Pradesh is very tense. Separatist voices could be heard from Arunachal in the coming years. A separatist movement in the state is in waiting if no immediate attention is paid to the problems people are facing there," the Arunachal MP told the party high command. Leader of the Opposition L.K. Advani and former external affairs ministers Jaswant Singh and Yashwant Sinha had a meeting with the Arunachal MP on Thursday. The BJP MP, who had been demanding that the government allow a parliamentary delegation and journalists to visit the "disputed site", which is now reportedly under the control of the neighbouring country, alleged that the Army was not allowing even parliamentarians to enter the areas and assess the ground reality. "Nobody actually knows how much land we have lost to China," the BJP MP told party leaders."

"Nobody actually knows how much land we have lost to China"…Well then, what was the basis of claiming that China had intruded 20 km of land in Arunachal Pradesh, Mr. Rijiju? Now I wonder, if it was at the behest of BJP and not as a concerned Arunachalee? But then, the non inclusion of parliamentarian of this state and the journalists in the visit of parliamentarian to the disputed area is also confusing.