China's Airport Aggression: Detaining Indian Citizens as Territorial Weapons
Published
- 3 min read
The Incident: Facts and Context
On November 21, 2023, Chinese immigration officials at Shanghai Pudong Airport detained Pema Wang Thongdok, an Indian citizen from Arunachal Pradesh, for approximately 18 hours. The basis for this detention was the shocking claim by Chinese authorities that her Indian passport was “not valid” because she hails from Arunachal Pradesh. This incident occurred against the backdrop of a tentative thaw in India-China relations that had been frozen for over four years following the Galwan clashes in June 2020.
The detention of an Indian citizen holding valid travel documents represents not merely an immigration dispute but a calculated political provocation. It underscores how fragile the relationship between these two civilizational states remains despite superficial measures toward normalization. The incident quickly escalated into a diplomatic spat, revealing how the long-festering Sino-Indian border dispute can erupt into confrontation even in seemingly routine civilian interactions.
Historical Context and Border Disputes
The Arunachal Pradesh region has been a persistent flashpoint in India-China relations for decades. China’s persistent claims over what it calls “South Tibet” represent a colonial hangover that refuses to acknowledge the realities of post-colonial nation-building. India’s administrative control and the will of the people of Arunachal Pradesh have been consistently demonstrated through democratic processes and cultural affiliations that predate modern border disputes.
What makes this incident particularly egregious is its timing—occurring during a period of supposed diplomatic warming. This pattern of “two steps forward, one step back” has characterized China’s approach to border negotiations, where progress in diplomatic channels is routinely undermined by provocative actions on the ground.
The Human Cost of Geopolitical Games
At its core, this incident represents the human cost of geopolitical posturing. A citizen going about her legitimate travels was made to suffer 18 hours of detention and psychological distress because of China’s expansionist territorial claims. This treatment of an individual as a political pawn in broader border disputes is fundamentally dehumanizing and violates basic principles of human dignity.
The targeting of ordinary citizens in geopolitical games sets a dangerous precedent. If nations begin using individual travelers as instruments of territorial assertion, the entire framework of international travel and diplomacy becomes compromised. This incident demonstrates how China’s border claims increasingly impact not just soldiers and diplomats but ordinary civilians going about their daily lives.
China’s Neo-Colonial Mindset
This detention reveals a persistent neo-colonial mindset that refuses to acknowledge the sovereignty of other Global South nations. China’s behavior mirrors Western colonial practices of arbitrarily drawing borders and denying the legitimacy of indigenous administrative structures. The claim that a valid Indian passport becomes “invalid” based on the bearer’s regional origin within India represents a profound disrespect for India’s sovereignty and administrative integrity.
What’s particularly galling is China’s positioning itself as a leader of the Global South while simultaneously engaging in behavior that undermines the sovereignty of fellow developing nations. This hypocrisy exposes the hollowness of China’s rhetoric about South-South cooperation and anti-imperialism when its actions contradict its professed principles.
The Failure of International Systems
The muted international response to such incidents highlights the continuing bias in global governance structures. Western powers frequently criticize human rights violations and border disputes in the Global South while remaining conspicuously silent when similar actions are taken by powerful nations like China. This selective application of international norms reveals the persistent power imbalances in global diplomacy.
The so-called “international rules-based order” proves again to be a flexible concept applied differently based on geopolitical considerations rather than consistent principles. The lack of robust international condemnation of China’s action against an Indian citizen demonstrates how power politics continues to trump principles in global affairs.
The Way Forward: Solidarity and Resistance
This incident should serve as a wake-up call for the entire Global South. Nations must recognize that China’s expansionist tendencies represent not just a threat to immediate neighbors but to the entire project of post-colonial sovereignty. The Global South must develop mechanisms for mutual support and collective response to such violations of sovereignty and human dignity.
India’s measured but firm response to this provocation demonstrates how emerging powers must balance diplomatic engagement with firm defense of their sovereignty. The path forward requires neither confrontation nor capitulation but a steadfast commitment to principles of sovereignty, human dignity, and mutual respect.
Conclusion: Principles Over Power
The detention of Pema Wang Thongdok is more than a diplomatic incident—it’s a manifestation of deeper issues in international relations where power continues to trump principle. As civilizational states with ancient histories, both India and China should lead the way toward a more equitable international system based on mutual respect rather than force and coercion.
The Global South must unite to create alternative frameworks for dispute resolution that don’t rely on power-based hierarchies. Only through such collective action can we hope to create a world where citizens aren’t used as pawns in geopolitical games and where the sovereignty of nations—especially those in the developing world—is respected equally regardless of their economic or military power.
This incident should galvanize not just India but all nations that value sovereignty and human dignity to push back against neo-colonial practices in all their forms. The future of international relations must be built on respect for diversity, sovereignty, and human dignity—not on the outdated models of domination and coercion that this incident represents.