When maps become weapons: China and India’s new border battle GEOPOLITICAL ANALYSIS BY TEYMUR ATAYEV

The dispute over the McMahon Line, drawn in 1914 by British India and Tibet as part of the Simla Convention, remains one of the principal geopolitical fault lines between the two nuclear-armed Asian powers, China and India. As a result, even attempts to standardise geographical names can quickly trigger a diplomatic confrontation between the two countries, with the potential to spill beyond the realm of rhetoric.

On August 10, China’s Foreign Ministry reiterated Beijing’s position that it has never recognised the “so-called Arunachal Pradesh, illegally established by India.” The statement came in response to steps previously taken by New Delhi to publish “standard names” for 27 locations in the area, which Beijing described as “illegal and invalid.”

The immediate background to the latest exchange dates back to August 7, when India officially recorded 27 locations and geographical features in the region under their “standard names” on maps published by the Survey of India. New Delhi said the move was intended to ensure the “accurate identification of territories and raise public awareness of their historical and geographical significance.”

Indian sources presented the decision as a response to what they described as China’s repeated attempts to rename locations in the border state. They also stressed the significance of the map being published, apparently for the first time, with provisions allowing members of the public open access to it. According to this interpretation, India was using the map to reaffirm its “absolute sovereignty and jurisdiction” over the territories in question.

The inclusion of a photograph of the Tawang Monastery on the map was described as particularly symbolic. The monastery is one of the locations of major religious and cultural significance to China in the context of its territorial claims.

India has also pointed to Beijing’s own practice of standardising geographical names in the disputed region. China refers to Arunachal Pradesh as Zangnan, meaning the southern part of Tibet, and has issued lists of “standardised names” for locations there on four occasions. The latest came in 2024, when Beijing announced “30 new names for various places in Arunachal Pradesh.” New Delhi considers the territory an “integral and inalienable part of India.”

Against this backdrop, Indian media periodically circulate reports alleging incursions by Chinese troops into Arunachal Pradesh. Indian officials, however, have at times rejected such reports. In July 2026, for example, claims that the People’s Liberation Army had entered Arunachal Pradesh and established camps there were dismissed as “false and baseless,” with officials saying the reports were based on rumours and stressing that “Indian soldiers are deployed around the clock along the border.”

In April this year, Beijing set out its official position on the issue. It stated that “Zangnan is Chinese territory, and China has never recognised the so-called Arunachal Pradesh, illegally established by India.” Against this backdrop, Beijing argued that the Chinese government’s “standardisation of the names of some geographical features in the Zangnan area is purely an internal matter of China, falling within the scope of its sovereignty.”

The roots of the dispute go back to 1959, when India first accused China of having “seized part of the state of Arunachal Pradesh,” triggering clashes along the border. Tensions subsequently intensified and culminated in the 1962 Sino-Indian War, which ended with Chinese forces defeating the Indian army and consolidating control over the strategically important Aksai Chin region. The plateau provides a vital link between Xinjiang and Tibet.

The dispute has also drawn the attention of the United States. In 2024, the U.S. State Department said Washington recognised Arunachal Pradesh as part of India while simultaneously declaring its “strong opposition” to any unilateral attempts to “advance territorial claims” over the state.

Beijing responded by sharply criticising the U.S. position, accusing Washington of “provoking disputes between other countries without any restraint in pursuit of its geopolitical interests.” China argued that the question of the Sino-Indian border, which has never been formally demarcated, was exclusively a matter for the two countries themselves. “Southern Tibet is Chinese territory, and this is indisputable,” Beijing stated.

Thus, experts note that the steps taken by India on August 7 have once again heightened tensions in the region. Some analysts argue that New Delhi deliberately provoked the situation, pointing out that the maps were published just one day after the 36th meeting of the Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination on India-China Border Affairs. According to India’s Ministry of External Affairs, the two sides, having reaffirmed the importance of maintaining peace and tranquillity in the border areas for the development of bilateral relations, agreed to continue using military and diplomatic channels to address outstanding issues and prevent misunderstandings and miscalculations along the Line of Actual Control. They also discussed aspects of border delimitation and cross-border cooperation.

However, everything unfolded in precisely the opposite direction, which some observers consider far from accidental in light of another anti-China move in the region.

According to Chinese sources, the Secretariat of the Pacific Islands Forum is considering Taiwan’s participation in the annual leaders’ meeting scheduled for late August. In this regard, Beijing stressed that “China’s position remains consistent and clear on the participation of Taiwan, a region of China, in the activities of international organisations – this issue must be handled in accordance with the one-China principle.”

Against this backdrop, members of the expert community do not rule out the possibility that the anti-China measures undertaken in the region in recent days were not spontaneous. In this context, New Delhi’s recent decision to publish the map featuring “standard names” for locations in Arunachal Pradesh is in some cases being viewed as a move directed against China, which could contribute to destabilising the situation in the region.