China Says ‘Arunachal Is Theirs’. What History Says; And Where India Stands

“Sarhad ke iss paar bhi kahani hai… aur uss paar bhi.”


That sentiment reflects the long-standing disagreement over Arunachal Pradesh - a region shaped by old boundary lines, shifting Himalayan politics and two nations building different stories from the same landscape. The dispute stretches back to early maps, colonial-era decisions and the changing status of Tibet. India continues to govern the region without interruption, while China maintains a competing claim rooted in its own historical interpretation. The result is a disagreement layered across decades, geography and memory — still alive in the mountains where borders quietly begin and loudly debate. A boundary was drawn in 1914 between British India and Tibet, creating a clear line that placed the present Arunachal region on the Indian side. Tibet accepted this boundary, while China did not, arguing that Tibet could not finalise territorial decisions independently. The differing reactions to the same agreement form the starting point of the dispute.

• The boundary came to be known as the McMahon Line.
  
• India considers this the legitimate border.
  
• China rejects the arrangement, saying Tibet lacked autonomy.

The area that is now Arunachal Pradesh was gradually brought under administrative frameworks designed by British India. Offices, patrol posts, and administrative divisions were created to manage local affairs, and the region was formally organised as the North East Frontier Agency.

• Administration expanded through surveys and posts.
  
• The territory remained under Indian governance through 1947.
  
• China did not manage the territory during this period.

After the People’s Republic of China was established, Beijing began asserting authority over territories it associated with Tibet’s historical influence. This included areas in the Eastern Himalayas, which Beijing termed “South Tibet”, overlapping with present-day Arunachal Pradesh.

• China argues the region belonged to areas linked with Tibet.
  
• The claim is tied to its view of boundaries before 1914.
  
• China does not accept the line drawn between Tibet and British India.

India maintains that the region has remained under its administration in a continuous manner since the early 1900s. After independence, India retained the same boundary and governance structure inherited from British India, including law enforcement, taxation, and conduct of elections.

• The boundary India follows is the same drawn in 1914.
  
• Arunachal’s local systems, governance, and institutions function under India.
  
• Residents have participated in India’s political system since independence.

A military conflict between India and China in 1962 briefly shifted control in some parts of the region. China advanced south of the boundary but later announced a unilateral withdrawal to positions behind the same line that India recognises.

• The advance lasted only for the duration of the conflict.
  
• China’s withdrawal restored India’s control over the region.
  
• No new boundary was established after the withdrawal.

When India upgraded the region from a Union Territory to the state of Arunachal Pradesh in 1987, China objected strongly, viewing this as formalising Indian authority over an area it continued to claim. India said the change was administrative, not territorial.

• China viewed the upgrade as solidifying India’s control.
  
• India referred to it as an internal, administrative step.
  
• Governance systems continued functioning under Indian law.

In recent decades, China has undertaken several symbolic actions to reassert its claim. These include issuing stapled visas to residents of Arunachal Pradesh, renaming places using Mandarin names, releasing maps that show the region within Chinese borders, and objecting to Indian leaders’ visits.

• These measures reflect China’s non-acceptance of the current boundary.
  
• No administrative control accompanies these symbolic steps.
  
• The region remains governed by India despite China’s objections.

Internationally, the area is treated as part of India’s administered territory. Maps, global databases, and multilateral frameworks follow the line India accepts as the boundary. The region participates fully in India’s political and administrative systems, including representation in Parliament.

• Global references show the region under Indian administration.
  
• International atlases reflect the boundary recognised by India.
  
• China continues to maintain its claim, but the area functions as an Indian state.