India China relations: As Modi meets Xi, what is the Panchsheel doctrine

The Chinese foreign ministry statement, meanwhile, mentioned the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, or Panchsheel. “The Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, advocated by the older generation of leaders of China and India over 70 years ago, must be cherished and promoted,” the release said.

What is Panchsheel, and when was it first spoken about in the context of India-China ties? Here’s a brief history.

What are the five principles of Panchsheel?

After India’s independence in 1947 and the creation of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the two countries tried to frame terms of engagement. One of the sticking issues was the fate of Tibet.

After many rounds of negotiations, on April 29, 1954, Agreement on Trade and Intercourse between the Tibet region of China and India was signed, which included the delineation of Panchsheel, or the Five Principles of Peaceful Co-existence.

The principles are:

1. Mutual respect for each other’s territorial integrity and sovereignty,

2. Mutual non-aggression,

3. Mutual non-interference,

4. Equality and mutual benefit, and

5. Peaceful co-existence.”

While some credit India’s first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, for coming up with the doctrine, many experts believe Panchsheel as it is known today was first formulated by the Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai, though Nehru had expressed similar views on different occasions.

Defining Panchsheel in Lok Sabha in September 1955, Nehru said, “It is in no spirit of pride or arrogance that we pursue our own independent policy. We would not do otherwise unless we are false to everything India has stood for in the past and stands for today. We welcome association and friendship with all and the flow of thought and ideas of all kind, but we reserve the right to choose our own path. That is the essence of Panchsheel.”

Panchsheel’s path, legacy

While China wanted Five Principles to be seen as its guiding philosophy in international relations, India initially looked at it more as a doctrine to guide bilateral ties. As the Cold War worsened, however, New Delhi too spoke of Panchsheel as an alternative way of co-existence in a world dominated by the big players’ powerplay.

As former Indian Foreign Service officer Chandrasekhar Dasgupta wrote in EPW in 2016, “With the recruitment of Pakistan as a US ally, the Cold War arrived at India’s doorstep. Nehru’s advocacy of Panchsheel now acquired a new dimension. He saw Panchsheel as a means of buttressing non-alignment and a “zone of peace” in India’s neighbourhood.”

Though India-China ties were to worsen soon after the signing of the Tibet agreement, the principles espoused in Panchsheel were echoed in other international agreements signed around that time.

According to an MEA document published 50 years after the signing of the agreement, “Panchsheel was incorporated into the Ten Principles of International Peace and Cooperation enunciated in the Declaration issued by the April 1955 Bandung Conference of 29 Afro-Asian countries. The universal relevance of Panchsheel was emphasised when its tenets were incorporated in a resolution on peaceful co-existence presented by India, Yugoslavia and Sweden, and unanimously adopted on December 11, 1957, by the United Nations General Assembly. In 1961, the Conference of Non-Aligned Nations in Belgrade accepted Panchsheel as the principled core of the Non-Aligned Movement.”

In the long, fluctuating arc of India-China ties, Panchsheel is mentioned whenever there is an upturn. For example, then Prime Minister AB Vajpayee, speaking at Beijing University on June 23, 2003, said, “One cannot wish away the fact that before good neighbours can truly fraternize with each other, they must first mend their fences. After a hiatus of a few decades, India and China embarked on this important venture a few years ago. We have made good progress. I am convinced that, with steadfast adherence to the Five principles of peaceful coexistence, with mutual sensitivity to the concerns of each other, and with respect for equality, our two countries can further accelerate this process so that we can put this difference firmly behind us.”