|India was an independent dominion within the British Commonwealth, emerged out from British Raj under enactment of ‘Transfer of Power’ Act passed by the British Parliament and not through ‘Independence’ Act as conventional historiography sedulously spreads the myth about the factual status. The absence of the word ‘independent’ in the preamble of the Constitution is not an aberration but a deliberate act on the part of our leaders. The word ‘Republic’ is used only once in the preamble in spite of it’s being one of the voluminous document of the world. As a matter of fact, it was more sophisticated bondage than direct colonial rule.
Under the normal rules of the National Archives of India, records pertaining to a period before 30 years are usually treated as ‘open’ and are available to research scholars. But the records relating to the 1914 Shimla Convention, held over 100 years ago, are not yet made ‘open’ for reasons best known to the authorities. The Government of India, since refuses adamantly to open its archival records pertaining to those years, the students of India’s foreign affairs are constrained to fall back on foreign sources.
To trace the roots of the history and politics of India-China conflicts, India-China border dispute and Tibet issue, one must understand die difference between two types of domains of politics in India and China. In India, new rulers, inheritors of British Raj, were representing the dominant groups of indigenous society of the colonial authorities. In China, new rulers were representing the groups constituting the laboring population and the intermediate strata in town and country. In China, it was People’s Republic. Unlike China, in India the long struggles waged by elites’ politics and people’s politics, were defeated in 1947 and were continued by these former colonial authorities and their Indian allies—big bourgeoisie and landlords. The politics of big bourgeoisie and big landlords never sought even freedom outside the orbit of imperialism. When even the cause of national liberation movement was sabotaged, how the question of people’s revolution could arise? In China, things happened together, country got freedom, as a nation, they were liberated and the people brought the revolution. The roots of the confrontation between China and India can be traced in these two types domains of politics adopted by them in late forties. It is indeed shocking that our new rulers did not dissociate themselves from the imperialist offensive the British often mounted on our Asian neighbors from safe haven of their Indian colony. The problems of the British heritors and their Red nightmares are understandable by their correspondence of November 1950.
Read the Home Minister Vallabhbhai Patel/s note to the Prime Minister and Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru’s Note on China & Tibet