Dragonfire (16 page)

Harding
: In this BBC
Globe Talk
exclusive, we have the Chinese Foreign Minister, Jamie Song, live from Hong Kong, and with me in the studio is General Sir Peter
Hanman, a military consultant with the Institute of Strategic Studies in London. We will be discussing the tension between India and China.

After the dramatic prison break-out in the Tibetan capital Lhasa, by the little-known Indian regiment, the Special Frontier Force, India has said sorry. China hasn’t accepted the apology
and, as you’ll see on the map on your screens now, thousands of Chinese troops are pouring into these sensitive border areas with China. Europe and America have appealed for calm. China and
India – and this is one thing they seem to agree on – say it’s nobody else’s business but their own.

The other complications in this alarming turn of events is that the revered Buddhist monk Lhundrup Togden who was freed from prison in the raid is still at large and believed to be heading for
India. Fighting has also flared up again between India and Pakistan in Kashmir. Both are nuclear powers and Pakistan has just been shaken by a military takeover. Jamie Song in Hong Kong, before we
start taking calls from our viewers, can you set our minds at rest that China is not trying to stir things up in Asia?

Song
: Not at all, Max. Your excellent précis of events sums up the situation. Perhaps, though, I can make a comparison closer to home for Europeans. Suppose
renegade troops in the Republic of Ireland burst across the border into British territory in the North and released convicted terrorists from the Maze prison.

Harding
: I think you’re stretching the imagination . . .

Song
: Am I? Many people in Northern Ireland, Ireland and the rest of the world believe Ulster should be part of Ireland – as many believe Tibet should have its
independence from China. But the hard facts are that Tibet is part of China and Northern Ireland is a part of the United Kingdom. I dare say there are those within the Irish armed forces who
sympathize with the Republican cause, and in my scenario they act on their sympathies, just as India claims commandos in the Special Frontier Force have done. What would the UK then do? Would it
simply accept an apology from the Irish government and continue with business as usual? Or would it put the apology on hold, try to find out exactly what happened and in the interim reinforce the
border to ensure that nothing like it could possibly happen again?

Harding
: General Hanman. Let me bring you in here. You served many years in Northern Ireland.

Hanman
: I can’t speak for the government, of course. But in the Foreign Minister’s scenario, we in the armed forces would certainly urge the government to do
what Jamie Song suggests – reinforce the border.

Harding
: All right, we have our first caller, who happens to be in Hong Kong. Go ahead.

Hong Kong
: Yes. I want to ask Jamie Song. I have two questions. Firstly, did you know that India kept a commando force of Tibetan nationalists specially trained to fight
against Chinese troops in Tibet? And number two. Isn’t it time China took the opportunity from this incident to reclaim back the land across the border which is now occupied by India?

Harding
: Foreign Minister?

Song
: I personally was not aware of the Special Frontier Force, but I am a businessman and diplomat. Of course, I am fully briefed now. China had repeatedly asked India
to disband the unit and had pointed out the dangers. India refused until—

Harding
: Excuse me for interrupting, Foreign Minister, but can you confirm that, Sir Peter? India ignored Chinese appeals?

Hanman
: That is my understanding. But Prime Minister Dixit acted with exceptional swiftness once he discovered what had happened. I don’t think China could have
asked for more.

Harding
: Jamie Song. Your second question. Should China now reclaim land you say is occupied by India?

Song
: We are very pragmatic about this. The territory under dispute is not prime real estate in Manhattan or Mayfair. Nor is it valuable like the oil fields of the Middle
East. It is a pretty grim and inhospitable part of the world. The main issue here is Tibet. If India opened negotiations for a new border agreement and made an unequivocal statement that it would
not support Tibetan independence, we would have absolutely nothing to quarrel about.

Harding
: By that you mean India would have to expel the Dalai Lama?

Song
: Yes. The Dalai Lama can live out his days in Europe or America. But not on our borders.

Harding
: We have a caller from Delhi. A former admiral, I believe. Go ahead, New Delhi.

Delhi
: Yes. I am Admiral Ravi Jacob retired. I understand China is moving naval vessels into the Indian Ocean. Could the Foreign Minister confirm this?

Harding
: This is in reference to intelligence reports that two
Kilo
-class submarines have passed through the Straits of Malacca into the Indian Ocean. The closest
Indian territory is the Andaman and Nicobar Islands and New Delhi plans to protest to the United Nations.

Song
: Admiral Jacob, I honestly don’t know about that. I could tell you to ask Admiral Li, the head of our navy, but I know he won’t tell you, just as
I’m sure the British Foreign Secretary Chris Baker has no idea where all the British submarines are at the moment. But I will say this. The Chinese navy has a right and a national obligation
to send its warships and submarines into any international waters it wishes. It is a ridiculous notion to suggest that while American and European battle groups can sail the seas at will, those of
China are confined to specific areas.

Harding
: Sir Peter Hanman, can you enlighten us any more on this?

Hanman
: There is nothing new about Chinese naval passage through the Andaman Sea. The Burmese have given Chinese full naval facilities at Hanggyi Island and they have a
surveillance station on the Cocos Islands from which they track Indian missile tests. India doesn’t like it, but can do nothing about it. The United States didn’t like Castro in Cuba
and Cuba didn’t like the American base of Guantanamo on its territory left over from a previous treaty. I’m sorry to jump around the world so much, but I think it’s important to
bring in these comparisons. Nobody is special here. Things happen in geopolitical change which governments don’t like. But that doesn’t mean you go to war over it.

Harding
: A call from Seattle. The caller doesn’t want to give his name, but has already identified himself to us as a supporter of the Tibetan independence
movement. Go ahead, Seattle.

Seattle
: What will China do if Lama Togden gets to safety in India?

Song
: We will ask India to return him in order for him to serve the rest of his sentence.

Seattle
: And if India doesn’t?

Song
: I think we shouldn’t speculate.

Harding
: Perhaps, Foreign Minister, this a good opening for you to give us a run-down on what exactly is happening in Tibet. You have sealed it off, banned all foreign
visitors, yet Western satellite pictures show widespread civil disturbance in many towns.

Song
: Yes, Max, you are right. If I could return to my analogy with Northern Ireland, a small number of Tibetan nationalists have used the Drapchi incident to try to
ferment civil unrest. They are being armed and helped by units from the SFF which appear to have been infiltrated into many areas. And I might emphasize that these soldiers are doing exactly what
they were trained to do when the SFF was created in 1962. The Chinese army is trying to stop the rebellion, but in many places our troops are fighting pitched battles with the insurgents. If a
similar incident happened in Northern Ireland, I am sure Britain would not allow an Irish delegation into the Falls Road at the height of the disturbances.

Harding
: I think they might—

Song
: Please. Let me finish, because young Chinese men and young Tibetans are killing each other as we speak in this conflict. We did not start it. India ignited
something it cannot control. We have, in any case, just announced that the disturbances are over. I have today issued an invitation for diplomats accredited to Beijing to visit Lhasa as soon as it
is safe for them to do so.

Harding
: The Tibetan government-in-exile accuses your troops of massacring civilians in their hundreds.

Song
: Well, we wouldn’t expect them to say we were serving them tea and cutting firewood for them.

Harding
: We have a call from Islamabad. Go ahead.

Islamabad
: India is also reinforcing its border with Pakistan. Its warplanes have bombed villages, killing civilians in Kashmir. Many of us in Pakistan fear we are going
to be swallowed up by India. China is an old ally. I’m pleading with you to do something to help.

Song
: Kashmir is a very difficult problem and I don’t think there is anything China should do to inflame the situation any more. You are right, though. We do have
very genuine and strong links with Pakistan, and China would certainly not like to see her treated unjustly by the international community.

Harding
: Sir Peter Hanman, is the Chinese alliance with Pakistan significant? Is it something we should take into account as tensions over Kashmir and Tibet mount?

Hanman
: It exists, for sure. Pakistan’s military is largely supplied by China, including its intermediate- and short-range missiles. China helped Pakistan with its
nuclear-arms programme.

Song
: I refute that unequivocally. The allegation—

Harding
: OK, Foreign Minister, we’ve taken your viewpoint on board.

Hanman
: Up until the 1965 war with India, Pakistan was pretty much a Cold War ally of the United States. India was non-aligned, but regarded as in the Soviet
camp—

Harding
: Sorry to interrupt, Sir Peter, but it appears we have a former Pakistani Chief of Army Staff on the line from Rawalpindi, General Awan. Why don’t we get it
from the horse’s mouth.

Rawalpindi
: Yes. Thank you. During the fifties, Pakistan opted for an alliance with the United States. The question of looking to China began actually during the 1962
Sino-Indian War, when America sided with India, and China offered friendship to Pakistan. In the 1965 war with India, when we were still technically a Western ally, Pakistan was completely
abandoned by the United States. We were left without spares. No new equipment was available. We pleaded with the Americans to fulfil their agreements with us and they refused. It was like a stab in
the back, and we turned to China. For fifteen years, between 1965 and 1980, there was very little military contact with Washington. China provided everything we needed. She gave us four billion
dollars’ worth of weapons and didn’t charge a penny for it. And I would like to take the opportunity to thank Foreign Minister Song for the complete friendship China has shown us over
the so many years.

Harding
: Then came the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

Rawalpindi
: Quite right, Mr Harding. The United States needed its Cold-War ally back and we let them take us. American relations with China were improving at the time,
and Beijing, which had no love for the Soviets either, told us it didn’t mind. In 1990, the Cold War ended and the Soviets were out of Afghanistan. But the nuclear-proliferation issue raised
its ugly head and the United States stabbed us in the back again. We were making legitimate efforts to create a nuclear deterrent against India, yet the Pressler Amendment made all US aid
conditional on our not possessing a nuclear device.

Harding
: So you went to China?

Rawalpindi
: Washington cut more than half a billion dollars of the money it had promised us. Yes, we went to China, and I for one regret we ever again danced to
Washington’s tune. America corrupted our ruling classes and its support for the mujahedin guerrillas in Afghanistan, created a monster of violent religious fundamentalism which we are now
having to contend with. That is why the people of Pakistan and the armed forces support the middle way being forged by General Hamid Khan and his government.

Harding
: Gentlemen, I’ve just been told that the Reuters news agency is sending over dramatic and horrific pictures of the situation inside Tibet. They have been
smuggled out of Lhasa to Beijing. We don’t know how and we are now going over live to that Reuters feed and I’m told what we are seeing now is a protest outside the official buildings
of the government of Lhasa.

The camera was on a position above the crowd and held completely steady, letting the action take place within the frame. Hundreds of demonstrators were at a junction of two
major roads. A traffic light in the left-hand top corner of the screen was smashed. On the roof of a drab government building the cameraman picked up a machine-gun position. The lens zoomed in
shakily. Three men manned it, and a fourth, wearing white gloves, had his pistol drawn. He was shouting, but the camera did not pick up any of his sound.

The roar of the protesters came through clearly, though. They were unarmed and included many women and children, most waving banners and carrying pictures of Togden and the Dalai Lama. As they
reached an open area outside the compound, an armoured personnel carrier drove out of a nearby gate towards them. The crowd held its ground, mothers bringing their children closer to them. On the
roof of the building, the soldier with the pistol was on the radio, gesticulating and pointing. The three men were ordered away from the machine gun. Those among the demonstrators who saw it
cheered and held their banners higher, but at that moment the commander of the armoured personnel carrier opened fire straight into the crowd. Amazingly, the Tibetans did not disperse. They stayed
where they were, collapsing on top of each other, until the firing stopped.