Neighbors are angry over giving asylum to Dalai Lama and Sheikh Hasina; India faces the challenge of maintaining diplomatic balance

Dalai Lama, Sheikh Hasina – Photo Credit-ANI

China is angry with India for giving asylum to Dalai Lama and a clear opinion on his succession, while the interim government of Bangladesh is upset with giving asylum to Sheikh Hasina. But despite these resentments, India under the leadership of a strong leader is firm on its stand of protecting refugees.

In West Asia, there are major challenges to Indian diplomacy in terms of the delicate balance between Iran and Israel or Putin’s war in Ukraine. But at the moment, India is facing a more direct challenge due to the presence of spiritual leader Dalai Lama and ousted Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. India’s clear stand on the matter of Dalai Lama’s succession is that this process should be left to the Tibetan leaders and their community, which has made China unhappy. Beijing has been further irritated by the comments of Indian Union Minister Kiren Rijiju in this matter, because Rijiju is a Buddhist from Arunachal Pradesh, on which China has been staking claim. Beijing’s Foreign Office spokesperson also objected to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s congratulations to the Dalai Lama on his 90th birthday, saying that China will not tolerate any interference in its internal affairs.

Beijing’s dilemma: The current Dalai Lama had put China in a dilemma by saying that by the end of 2024 he will decide whether the institution of Dalai Lama will continue after his death or not. If he did, there would be no succession issue and the leadership of the Tibetan community would be in the hands of the elected, government-in-exile based in Dharamsala and the Central Tibetan Administration run by a Sikyong (President). In fact, the Dalai Lama has delegated most of the matters related to the Tibetan community to the Sikyong and the government-in-exile. But the Sikyong will not have the spiritual pull of the Dalai Lama to maintain a continuous influence over the Tibetan community, inside and outside Tibet, and to keep alive the unique identity of Tibet in the world.

The Tibetan government-in-exile will remain a challenge for China, but if the Dalai Lama is not an institution, Beijing can pressurise India to deny shelter and support to the government-in-exile on its soil by labelling it separatist.

In Voice for the Voiceless, published this year, the Dalai Lama has said that his successor will be born in a free world, that is, outside China, which angered China. This was seen as a clever move to deny any role of the Chinese government in the succession of the Dalai Lama. If the current Dalai Lama were to name a successor outside China, the Chinese rulers would try to impose their own Dalai Lama on the Tibetans. As a result, there would be two Dalai Lamas – one backed by China and the other by the current Dalai Lama who is the successor of the Dalai Lama.

Beijing refuses to negotiate: Despite China calling the current Dalai Lama a ‘separatist’, the Tibetan spiritual leader has not supported an armed uprising for Tibetan independence, as the militant Khampas did in the late 1950s. He has sought negotiations with Beijing to decide Tibet’s future. When I interviewed the Dalai Lama in 2005, he expressed his desire to return to Tibet and spend the last years of his life there. When Xi Jinping became president, there were indications that he would call the Dalai Lama for talks, but perhaps he backed off so as not to tarnish his strong image. Such solutions have been found to overcome ethnic separatism in Indian democracy, but they are not appreciated in communist China or military-dominated Pakistan.

Implications for India: Indications are that the Tibet dispute will be a long one and India will also be dragged into it. There has been some progress between India and China on the border dispute, but India’s stand on the succession of the Dalai Lama will upset Beijing, which could disrupt the border talks and the Chinese Army (PLA) may start intrusions again on the Himalayan border. India is already worried about increasing Chinese pressure on Bhutan.

Apart from reviving the border dispute and taking hostile steps in the neighbourhood, China may also start supporting militants in India’s northeastern states.

Bangladesh’s displeasure: Bangladesh’s ousted Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has taken refuge in India since the student movement in August last year. In a meeting held in Bangkok on the sidelines of the BIMSTEC conference, Mohammad Yunus had requested Prime Minister Modi to rein in Sheikh Hasina, which Modi rejected saying that in the era of social media, no one can be stopped from freedom of expression.

The Yunus government has already formally demanded Hasina’s extradition to prosecute the countless cases filed against her. Now she is being tried in her absence. If the Bangladesh government involves Interpol in this for the extradition of Sheikh Hasina, then India will find itself in a difficult situation, as there is an extradition treaty between the two countries. Hasina is constantly in touch with her party leaders and workers and is increasing Yunus’ troubles by accusing him. Yunus remains a favourite of China, the US and Pakistan, but the tacit consent of thousands of Awami League leaders and supporters in India is increasing Yunus’s concern.

Like the Dalai Lama, India is also supporting Hasina. The Dalai Lama has India’s support for spiritual reasons, while Hasina has it for political reasons. Hasina and her late father Sheikh Mujibur Rahman have been India’s trusted allies. In any case, withdrawing support from Hasina will be seen as India’s weakness.

This option is unacceptable for a regional power that aspires to play its role on the global stage under the leadership of a Prime Minister who boasts of his strong image. This also means that India will have to be ready to bear its consequences.