In 1975, the Indian troops stationed in Sikkim suddenly launched a military coup, dissolving the Sikkim king's palace guard and placing the king under house arrest.
Following this, under the manipulation of the Indian government, a so-called "referendum" was held in Sikkim, resulting in the decision to merge Sikkim into India, making it a state of the country.
However, despite Sikkim maintaining a high degree of internal governance autonomy under the Indian federation system, and with the majority of its residents being Nepalese immigrants with Nepali and Bhutanese as the main official languages, this change led to numerous issues.
Since India's annexation of Sikkim, several northeastern states in India have been seeking independence as a means to gain economic or policy support from the Indian government.
So, what has the Indian government paid to appease the northeastern states, including Sikkim?
The history of the Kingdom of Sikkim dates back to 1642 when Phuntsog Namgyal established the Namgyal dynasty in Sikkim.
This marked the official emergence of a hereditary monarchy in the Sikkim region.
For nearly 300 years, the fate of the Kingdom of Sikkim was closely tied to China.
Before the British East India Company intervened in 1814, the Kingdom of Sikkim struggled to survive under the pressure from Nepal and Bhutan.
During the Qing dynasty, China dispatched troops to help Sikkim "restore the country," but due to China's weakened national power at the time and the pressing threat from Western invaders, it had to compromise.
In 1861, shortly after the end of the Second Opium War, Britain declared the inclusion of the Sikkim area within its sphere of influence.
In 1887, British troops forcibly occupied Sikkim and dispatched commissioners to administer it.
In 1890, the Qing dynasty and Britain signed the "Convention of Calcutta," recognizing the Kingdom of Sikkim as a British protectorate.
In 1918, Britain returned the ruling power to the Sikkim King Tashi Namgyal, and the Kingdom of Sikkim began a series of internal reforms under the monarchical system.
However, after India declared independence in 1947, the Indian government, claiming to "inherit British interests in Sikkim," sent commissioners to Sikkim, gradually setting the stage for its annexation.
In 1949, the Indian government, under the pretext of "preventing internal turmoil in Sikkim," dispatched troops to Sikkim and appointed an Indian as the Prime Minister of Sikkim.
In 1974, under strict surveillance by the Indian military, the Sikkim Parliament passed the so-called "Sikkim Constitution," making Sikkim an "associate state" of India.
In 1975, the Indian army staged a coup, followed by a national referendum, which decided to abolish the Sikkim monarchy and incorporate it into the Indian territory.
After its independence, India aimed to establish prestige in South Asia and globally, with territorial expansion being the most direct method.
Apart from expanding international influence, the Indian government had several other considerations for annexing Sikkim:
1. Utilizing the "colonial legacy" from British rule.
India, using the pretext of "inheriting British colonial rights," sent commissioners to Sikkim.
For a newly independent state, ensuring the "legitimacy" of leftover issues was essential.
The Sikkim issue was just one of the remnants of the British colonial period, and India's gradual control over Sikkim was thus "justified."
2. Valuing Sikkim's economic potential.
Sikkim initially relied on agriculture and animal husbandry, but with the development of modern mineral exploration technology, the region's abundant natural resources were gradually uncovered.
Additionally, Sikkim has a high forest coverage rate and abundant water resources, producing valuable traditional Chinese medicines. After becoming part of India, Sikkim received substantial economic assistance and policy support, making it one of the relatively affluent regions in India.
3. Strategic importance.
Sikkim is located on the southern slopes of the Himalayas, bordering Nepal to the west, Bhutan to the east, China’s Tibet to the north, and the Siliguri Corridor connecting the northeastern states to the rest of India to the south.
Controlling Sikkim can enhance India's security over the Siliguri Corridor, exert influence over Nepal and Bhutan, and serve as a strategic buffer with China.
The Cost India Paid to Control Sikkim
Despite gaining considerable benefits from annexing Sikkim, India also paid a significant price.
1. Political stability.
Since the Sikkim royal family still holds influence in the region, the Indian government had to invest heavily in maintaining political stability, such as strengthening security, moderately relaxing cultural autonomy, and not imposing Hindi as the official language in Sikkim.
2. Economic assistance.
To appease the people of Sikkim, the Indian government provided substantial economic support to improve their living standards and stabilize the political situation.
However, this economic support also aroused dissatisfaction among other northeastern states seeking independence, forcing the Indian government to balance various interests.
3. Diplomatic pressure.
India's annexation of Sikkim was condemned by the international community. The Sikkim royal family’s government-in-exile, sheltered by the United States, continued to exert diplomatic pressure on India. To alleviate international criticism, India had to continue providing various forms of aid to Sikkim.
The Setbacks of India's Expansion Strategy
Although India has made some economic achievements and plans to build a world-class navy by 2050 to achieve absolute control over the Indian Ocean and surrounding seas, its expansion strategy is not welcomed by neighboring countries.
For example, after the new president of the Maldives, Muizzu, took office, he demanded the withdrawal of Indian troops, indicating dissatisfaction with Indian hegemony in South Asian countries.
The economic potential and strategic location of Sikkim were the main reasons for India's insistence on annexation, but historical and cultural factors still pose challenges to India’s control over Sikkim.
To consolidate its rule over Sikkim, India has paid a significant price in political, economic, and diplomatic terms.
As India’s economy develops and its strategic ambitions expand to encompass the entire Indian Ocean, its expansionist behavior may face more challenges and resistance.
Comments