By Lt Gen P R Shankar (R)
On 28 August 2023, China’s Ministry of Natural Resources released a new “standard map.” The map included Taiwan and parts of the maritime zones of the Philippines, Vietnam, Brunei, Indonesia, and Malaysia. It added the tenth dash to its existing nine dash line claim in the South China Sea. It also depicted Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh as part of its territory. Very significantly the map included the entire Bolshoy Ussuriysky island – half of which is Russian territory.
It was puzzling. Why would China include an island in the confluence of Ussuri and Amur Rivers as its own when the Sino Russian Border stands delineated? In 2005 it was bilaterally decided that the Bolshoy Ussuriysky island would be split in half and the border would run in its centre. Why is China opening up a dispute specially when Putin and Xi Jinping had declared in a joint statement in Feb 2022 that “friendship between the two states has ‘no limits’, there are no ‘forbidden’ areas of co-operation”?
The answer came to light in a South China Morning Post headline on 17 May 2024. It read that “China must act fast to reclaim ‘lost territories’ from Russia”. It spoke of the Karakhan Manifesto and the Russian promise to abolish the Tsarist ‘unequal treaties’. It elucidated that the Karakhan Manifesto renounced all “conquests” that “deprived China of Manchuria and other areas”. Further the Karakhan Manifesto was purported to contain“ proposals promising to return to the Chinese people everything that was taken from them by the Tsarist government”. It stated that the Soviet government specifically mentioned words to the effect “the return to the Chinese people of what was taken from them requires first of all putting an end to the robber invasion of Manchuria and Siberia”.
The article highlights that with Putin bogged down in the Ukraine war, it may be the best time to tell Russia that it must recognise China’s rights to its “lost territories”. It goes on to argue that Russia is now dependant on China. It has a GDP six times and a population ten times that of Russia. This gives China a strong financial leverage over Russia. It must begin negotiating to get its land back ‘while the iron is hot’. ‘China must also threaten to stop purchases of Russian gas, timber, minerals and petroleum, and even cut its sale of much-needed dual purpose technology to Russia. Without China’s help, the Russian war machine in Ukraine would grind to a halt within months. The argument is taken further – ‘if it is justified for Russia to take part of Ukraine then it is equally justified for China retaking its old territories in the Russian Far East’! Very very intriguing indeed!
What is the Karakhan Manifesto?
It is a manifesto issued on July 25, 1919, by Lev Karakhan, of the USSR foreign ministry. It proclaims Russia’s unilateral renunciation of unequal treaties, territorial concessions, extraterritoriality, and its share of the Boxer indemnity, as well as the return of the Chinese Eastern Railway. In sum it offered to relinquish all Soviet claims to the special rights and privileges won by the Russian Tsarist government in China. However, the initial proposal, was later modified and the treaty was finally signed on May 31, 1924 after extended negotiations. Under the signed treaty the Russians surrendered only their rights of extraterritoriality and right of foreigners to be tried by their own consuls and to govern themselves in China. It also outlined joint Chinese-Soviet administration of the Chinese Eastern Railway, which was then running through Manchuria from Siberia to Vladivostok. In 1924 the Russians reclaimed the Railway, agreeing to the eventual purchase of the railway by China.
Interestingly it emerges, that there are two versions of the Karakhan manifesto! In the second version there are no proposals promising to return to the Chinese people everything that was taken from them by the Tsarist government. The more interesting issue is that Chinese accepted both the treaties and used them for different purposes at different times! This was due to the fact that they represented the first unilateral expression of friendship and offer of equality from a European country when Sun Yat Sen and China were seeking some kind of international acknowledgement / recognition. However, the important issue is that the Karakhan manifestos’ never mentioned anywhere that land will be given back. In any case as late as 2005, when China and Russia delineated their boundary along the Amur and Ussuri rivers on a mutually acceptable basis, this issue was never brought up.
So, what were the unequal treaties all about? The unequal treaties came about due to the expansion of Czarist Russia into regions along China’s Far Eastern frontier when the Qing Dynasty was weak and in decline. The first was the Treaty of Nerchinsk, of August 1689, which delimited a portion of the Far Eastern Sino-Russian boundary (see map). The next was the 1727 Treaty of Khiakhta (Burinsk) which approximately delimited the current Mongolia-Russia boundary. The third treaty was the 1858 Treaty of Aigun, which redrew the Sino Russian boundary along the Amur and Ussuri Rivers. The last treaty was the 1860 Treaty of Peking. Which granted the territory between the Amur and Ussuri Rivers and the Sea of Japan to Tsarist Russia. These territories roughly correspond to modern-day Amur Oblast and Primorsky Krai of Russia respectively. These areas are often referred to as Outer Manchuria, part of the greater region of Manchuria. The Chinese now want them back!
So the question is how to get it back from your Russian friend with whom you have a no forbidden areas friendship pact? The answer is to resort to the time tested salami slicing strategy! The well-established Chinese Salami Slicing methodology has a three step process. The first step is to create a legal dispute where none exists. However, it will be so small that everyone considers it as insignificant. Thereafter over a period, the dispute is amplified through fiction and false claims based on fabricated or altered history/facts. China makes it sound like a genuine grievance where the other party has deprived it of its rights. China then puts the other side on the defensive like it did with India in the case of Arunachal Pradesh. The second step has always been to officially lay claim on the area when there is adequate leverage established. Thereafter there the third step has been to wait for an opportune moment when China can change the status unilaterally by force or subterfuge when everyone’s attention is fixed on a crisis, or the weakened target state gives it away in helpless gratitude. We saw this happening with the way islands in the South China Sea were grabbed.
When one transposes this strategy in the current situation it emerges that the Chinese standard map issued in Aug 23 was the first step in the salami slicing strategy. It is small enough to be thought of as a minor irritant to be overlooked. Now this is being amplified and expanded through misrepresented history and altered facts. These are being put out to show that Russia is guilty of not adhering to treaty obligations and hence must return the land to its rightful owner. Again, the strategy is surreptitious. The article in SCMP is actually based on a letter to its editor based on an academic examination by a foreigner! This is being positioned as a people’s issue expressed through a public view. In due course more such letters will come. Then the Chinese government under public pressure is duty bound to take up the issue with Russia for return of the disputed territory. By then the territory under claim would have also expanded based on another falsified document. In due course, the second and third steps will unfold. By the time these steps unfold, the Chinese grip on Russia – economic, political, diplomatic and military – will be vice like and the latter will be leveraged to part with the territory!
Why is China doing this? A look at the map will inform you that annexation of the trans Amur and Ussuri river territories will give China access to the Sea of Japan. That is one huge strategic step in the dreams of Superpower China and its Sino Centric World Order. If Valdivostok falls into its kitty, it would be a big bonus. One does not know what the Russians think of this game plan. It would be interesting to see their reaction. The ‘limitless friendship’ with Russia is now bound by China’s territorial ambitions backed by the supposedly legal Karakhan Manifesto! It will do Russia well to start looking out for Chinese entry into ‘forbidden areas’ in violation of all their agreements. We in India are well versed with this salami slicing approach. All we can do is warn our Russian friends that when you are locked into Ukraine, the Chinese termite is eating your backdoor away.
The author is former Director General Artillery, Indian Army and is currently Professor, Aerospace Department, IIT Madras.
Disclaimer: Views expressed are personal and do not reflect the official position or policy of Financial Express Online. Reproducing this content without permission is prohibited.
