South International Law Research Of Ascription Problem And Its Solutions

The territory of southern Tibet is located to the east of the disputed Sino-Indianboundary with an area of90thousand square kilometers, and is the legacy of the eastwardexpansion of the British colonial power. After gaining independence, India attempted toinherit the legacy of the British colonists, so it occupied the area by force and migratedmillions of people there to establish the Arunachal Pradesh, which has never beenacknowledged by the Chinese government. Analysis of the international law on theadscription of the territory of southern Tibet reveals that before the Indian governmentillegally occupied that area, China had already gained sovereignty over it under occupatio.The local government of Tibet has always exerted effective administrative jurisdiction overthe land, and Dalai Lama VI himself was born in the Dawang district of southern Tibet.The Simla Convention upon which India’s sovereignty proposal over southern Tibet wasbased possessed weaknesses in agreement, and was signed under the circumstances of theforce, deception and threat of the British colonists. Besides, the representatives of China’scentral government only signed the treaty unofficially, while the treaty signed by the localgovernment of Tibet does not possess the contracting right, hence the treaty is invalid.Asfor regarding the MacMahon Line as the Sino-Indian boundary, it is only a unilateral claimby India, but not accepted by the Chinese government. In addition, the line was merelydrawn on the map without field investigation and delimitation, so it does not qualify forboundaries. India’s attempt to defend its claim by the international law principles such asinternational inheritance, watershed, acquiescence and estoppel does not hold water either.Britain has never owned the land of southern Tibet, thus India cannot inherit it. Theprinciple of watershed is not the only method of delimitation, while the real jurisdiction isthe basis of delimitation. Not to mention that the MacMahon Line does not go along thewatershed. As for the Chinese government’s acquiescence to the MacMahon Line, it is onlyIndia’s one-sided and mistaken understanding of China’s real intention, so the accusationdoes not stand.The ultimate solution to the adscription of the territory of southern Tibet requires time,wisdom and courage. In the current international community, peace and development are the themes of the era. China and India should solve the problem through peacefulnegotiations in the spirit of mutual respect, mutual understanding and consultation on equalfooting. The negotiations should proceed with the deliberation of historical facts andnational feelings, and should strive to solve the disputes on the western and middle areas ofterritories between China and India as a whole. Under the circumstances when the peacefultalks fail, other complementary methods such as legal methods, non-peaceful methods andthe development method of the water resources in the territory of southern Tibet could beconsidered in order to give rise to the final solution of the dispute over the territory ofsouthern Tibet.