REPORT ON THE QUESTION OF THE BOUNDRY BETWEEN CHINA AND BURMA

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP08C01297R000100190007-6
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 13, 2012
• Sequence Number: 7
• Publication Date: August 1, 1957
• Content Type: REPORT

Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/09/13: CIA-RDP08001297R000100190007-6
Supplement to "People's China," No. 15, 1957
e 5 *k
REPORT ON THE QUESTION OF THE BOUNDARY
LINE BETWEEN CHINA AND BURMA
Delivered on July 9, 1957, at the Fourth Session
of the First National People's Congress
CHOU EN - LAI
Premier and Foreign Minister
The question of the boundary line between
China and Burma is an important question in the
foreign relations of our country, a question in
which our people are greatly interested. The gov-
ernment therefore deems it necessary to make a
special report on this matter to the National
People's Congress.
We have inherited from the past questions of
undefined boundary lines between our country and
many neighbouring countries, and the one between
China and Burma has attracted public attention
particularly. This is because of the prolonged
disputes created by Britain over the boundary line
between China and Burma when Burma was under
British rule, and because in recent years the
forces of imperialism have constantly used the
boundary question between China and Burma to
sow discord between the two countries in an
attempt to create a tense situation.
Our government has consistently held that a
fair and reasonable settlement of all outstanding
questions between China and other countries
should be sought through peaceful negotiation.
The boundary question between China and Burma
is of long standing as well as complicated; so
from the moment our government began to tackle
it, it has taken a careful attitude to seek, step
by step and through suitable preparatory work,
a settlement of the question.
During the years immediately after the
founding of our state, our government was en-
grossed in a series of urgent, major tasks at
home and in its relations with foreign countries,
and was therefore unable at that time to make
comprehensive and systematic preparations for
the settlement of the Sino-Burmese boundary
question. However, since the Premiers of China
and Burma proposed in the communique on their
talks issued on December 12, 1954 that the ques-
tion of the undefined boundary line between the
two countries should be settled "at an appropriate
time through normal diplomatic channels," our
government has proceeded to make the necessary
preparations for the settlement of the question.
The various government departments concerned
have, jointly with the provincial authorities of
Yunnan, undertaken a systematic and detailed
examination and study of relevant historical data
and actual conditions.
In November 1955, just as the Chinese and
the Burmese sides were respectively making ac-
tive preparations for the settlement of the bound-
ary question, an armed clash unfortunately
occurred owing to misunderstanding between the
outpost units of the two countries in the border
region. This incident was properly dealt with
through the joint efforts of both sides, but at the
same time it made the governments of both coun-
tries realize the need for an early settlement of
the boundary question between the two countries.
Since the beginning of 1956 the Chinese and the
Burmese Governments have entered into frequent
contacts on the boundary question. In November
of the same year, Chairman U Nu of the Burmese
Anti-Fascist People's Freedom League came to
Peking at our invitation to hold consultations with
our government. In line with our foreign policy
of peace and on the basis of the results of our
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/09/13: CIA-RDP08001297R000100190007-6
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/09/13: CIA-RDP08001297R000100190007-6
examination and study of the boundary question,
our government made, through Chairman U Nu,
to the Burmese Government a proposal about
principles for the settling of the boundary ques-
tion. The proposal received the approval of the
Standing Committee of the National People's
Congress at its 50th meeting on November 5, 1956.
The greater part of the boundary line be-
tween China and Burma is fixed, but there are
three sections regarding which outstanding issues
remain to be settled. Our government made a
proposal about principles on these three sections
and held that the three-point proposal should be
considered as an integrated whole. Let me now
explain the contents of the proposal made by the
government.
The first point concerns the section in the
Kawa area. This section was explicitly provided
for in the two treaties on the Sino-Burmese
boundary line signed between China and Britain
in 1894 and 1897 respectively. But as the related
provisions are self-contradictory, this section was
for long not demarcated. To create a fait ac-
compli, Britain sent troops in the earlier part of
1934 to attack the areas of the Panhung and
Panlao tribes and were met with heroic resistance
from the Kawa people. This was the well-known
"Panhung Incident." In 1941, taking advantage
of the critical situation in which China was placed
during the War of Resistance to Japanese Aggres-
sion and using the closing of the Yunnan-Burma
Road as a pressure measure, Britain effected, in
an exchange of notes with the Kuomintang gov-
ernment on June 18, a demarcation in the Kawa
area to her advantage. This was the so-called
"1941 line." But since the Pacific war broke out
soon afterwards, no markers were erected along
the line. In the course of the discussion between
the Chinese and Burmese Governments in 1956 on
the boundary question, Burmese leaders indicated
that they could understand th,? Chinese people's
dissatisfaction with the 1941 line but, in view of
the fact that this section of the boundary had
been demarcated by an exchange of notes between
the Chinese and the British Governments respon-
sible at that time, they asked our government to
recognize the line and to withdraw the Chinese
troops from the area to the west of the 1941 line
which they had entered in 1952 when chasing after
remnant Kuomintang troops. It was the opinion
of our government that on the question of bound-
ary lines, demands made on the basis of formal
treaties should be respected according to general
international practice, but this by no means ex-
cluded the seeking by two friendly countries of
2
a settlement fair and reasonable for both sides
through peaceful negotiation between their gov-
ernments. In order to promote such a fair and
reasonable settlement and to create a favourable
atmosphere for it, our government in its proposal
about principles to the Burmese Government ex-
pressed its preparedness to withdraw its troops
from the area to the west of the 1941 line. At
the same time, our government asked that, pend-
ing a final agreement on the question of the 1941
line and the setting up of boundary markers,
Burmese troops should refrain from entering the
area to the west of the 1941 line evacuated by the
Chinese troops; however, the working personnel
of the Burmese Government may enter this area.
The second point concerns the Meng-Mao tri-
angular area, otherwise called the Namwan trian-
gular area, situated at the junction of the Nam-
wan River and the Shweli River and measuring
about 250 square kilometres. This is Chinese
territory, a fact which Britain also recognized in
explicit terms in the treaty. But before the sign-
ing of the Sino-British treaty on Sino-Burmese
boundary line in 1894, Britain, without obtaining
China's consent, built by compulsion a highway
through this area to join Bhamo with Namhkan.
By the time China and Britain signed another
treaty on the Sino-Burmese boundary line in 1897,
Britain under the name of "perpetual lease"
further secured jurisdiction over this piece of
Chinese territory. Following her independence,
Burma succeeded to the "perpetual lease" of the
area. In its proposal about principles to the
Burmese Government, our government pointed
out that it would be inconsistent with the rela-
tions of equality and friendship now existing be-
tween China and Burma for Burma to continue
the "perpetual lease" of a piece of Chinese terri-
tory. Our government expressed its readiness to
negotiate with the Burmese Government so as to
decide upon the concrete steps to abrogate the
"perpetual lease" of the Meng-Mao triangular
area.
The third point concerns the section to the
north of the High Conical Peak. This section of
the boundary line has never been delimited in the
past. Britain continually created conflicts in this
area and took the opportunity to expand its colo-
nial territory. The most serious of such conflicts
was the armed occupation of the Hpimaw area
by the British in the early part of 1911. The
"Hpimaw Incident" aroused the indignation of
the whole Chinese people and protest movements
spread with gathering force through all parts of
China. Under such circumstances, the British
Supplement to People's China
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/09/13: CIA-RDP08001297R000100190007-6
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/09/13: CIA-RDP08001297R000100190007-6
Government could not but acknowledge formally
in its note dated April 10, 1911 to the then Chi-
nese Government that the villages of the Hpimaw,
Kangfang and Gawlum area belong to China, but
it continued unreasonably to occupy this area. On
the basis of the results obtained from an examina-
tion and study of the historical facts and actual
conditions, our government made to the Burmese
Government the following proposal concerning the
demarcation of this section of the boundary line:
The section from Isurazi Pass northward to Diphu
Pass can be demarcated along the traditional
boundary line. The section from Isurazi Pass to
the High Conical Peak can in principle be deter-
mined along the watershed between the Nu River,
the Shweli River (otherwise called the Lungchuan
River) and the Taiping River on the one side
and the Nmai Hka River on the other, with the
exception of the Hpimaw, Kangfang and Gawlum
area which should be returned to China. Our
government asked at the same time that, during
the same period as Chinese troops would with-
draw from the area to the west of the 1941 line,
the Burmese Government should withdraw its
troops from Hpimaw, Kangfang and Gawlum.
Pending the final demarcation of this section, the
Burmese Government might retain its administra-
tion over Hpimaw, Kangfang and Gawlum, and
the Chinese Government undertook to refrain from
sending Chinese troops into these places before
this section would haVe been finally demarcated.
After the above proposal was made by our
government, Chairman U Nu expressed the view
that it was a fair and reasonable proposal taking
account of the interests of both sides. In the joint
press communique issued after the talks held be-
tween Chairman U Nu and the leading personnel
of our government it was declared that the Gov-
ernments of China and Burma had arrived at an
understanding that from the end of November
1956, Chinese troops would withdraw from the
area to the west of the 1941 line and Burmese
troops would withdraw from Hpimaw, Kangfang
and Gawlum, the withdrawal to be completed
before the end of the year. By the end of 1956,
the two governments had completed the with-
drawal of troops respectively. Thus a good start
was made for the settlement of the Sino-Burmese
boundary question. The leading personnel of the
two governments again had opportunities to
continue their friendly talks on the boundary
question in Rangoon in December 1956 and in
Kunming in March 1957. During these talks the
standpoints of the two sides were further clarified
and a general agreement of views was obtained.
August 1, 1957
People of all walks of life in our country take
a great interest in the settlement of the Sino-
Burmese boundary question. In order to obtain
views from a wider circle of our people, on behalf
of the government I made a report on this ques-
tion in the middle of March this year to the third
plenary session of the Second National Committee
of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Con-
ference. Present at the meeting also were depu-
ties to the National People's Congress who were
in Peking at the time, members of the govern-
ment and specially invited experts. At the end
of March I made in Kunming another report on
the question to a meeting called by the Yunnan
Provincial Committee of the People's Political
Consultative Conference and attended by repre-
sentatives of people of all walks of life of Yunnan
Province and representatives of various brother
nationalities. Earnest discussions took place at
these two widely represented meetings which gave
the government an opportunity to listen to the
opinions from different quarters and reply to
relevant questions raised, thus bringing into closer
agreement the views of the people of different
quarters in the country on the Sino-Burmese
boundary question.
Such, in brief, is what has taken place in the
handling of the Sino-Burmese boundary question
by our government up till the present. I should
like now to say a few words on the basic policy
followed by the government in dealing with this
boundary question between China and Burma.
Ever since the founding of the People's Re-
public the policy persistently followed by our
country in international affairs has been to strive
for the easing of the world situation and for
peaceful co-existence with all countries in the
world, and particularly with our neighbours. This
policy is beneficial to our country's socialist con-
struction; it also conforms to the interests of the
peoples of all countries in the world. It is pre-
cisely this basic foreign policy of peace that our
government has followed in handling the Sino-
Burmese boundary question.
Like so many outstanding questions existing
among Asian and African countries, the question
of the boundary line between China and Burma is
the result of the policy of aggression carried on
over the years by the imperialist powers. China
and Burma have now achieved independence and
are making efforts to secure a peaceful interna-
tional environment so that they can engage in
peaceful construction in their own countries. To-
gether with India, China and Burma were the
first to initiate the five principles of peaceful co-
existence. We all treasure our national indepen-
3
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/09/13: CIA-RDP08001297R000100190007-6
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/09/13: CIA-RDP08001297R000100190007-6
dence and national interests and know full well
that our national independence and national in-
terests can best be safeguarded only through peace-
ful co-existence and friendly co-operation. How-
ever, the imperialists have never ceased exploiting
the differences existing among Asian and African
countries to create tension and discord among
them and are trying hard to carry out again
their aggressive policy of "divide and rule" against
these countries. In view of all this, our govern-
ment, in discussing the boundary question with
the Burmese Government, has always stressed that
both sides should act in a spirit of sincerity and
carry out friendly negotiation in accordance with
the five principles of peaceful co-existence so
that a fair and reasonable settlement may be
arrived at. For this will not only further
consolidate and develop the friendly relations
between China and Burma, but also benefit the
solidarity among Asian and African countries. The
stand which our government takes in solving this
question is based on a desire to protect our na-
tional interests as well as promote Sino-Burmese
friendship and the solidarity among Asian and
African countries.
The boundary question between China and
Burma has behind it a complicated historical back-
ground. Therefore, in dealing with this question,
the treatment of historical data has become an
important problem. In the days when China was
under feudal rulers, its boundaries, like the bound-
aries of many other countries in the feudal era,
were not too well defined. Throughout the ages
the feudal dynasties in China maintained different
relations, varying in nature and degree, with the
nationalities living in the border areas. There-
fore it is almost impossible to define the boundaries
such as existed under Chinese feudal empires.
Furthermore, during the past sixty years or so
there have been many vastly different ways of
drawing the undefined boundary between China
and Burma in the maps published at home and
abroad. All this cannot but cause confusion in
wide circles as regards the undefined boundary
between China and Burma. Our government holds
that in dealing with the Sino-Burmese boundary
question we must adopt a serious attitude towards
historical data, we must take a correct stand and
viewpoint so as to make a scientific analysis and
appraisal of such data and to distinguish between
the data which can be used as a legal and reason-
able basis and those which have only reference
value as a result of changed conditions. At the
same time we must bear in mind the fundamental
changes of historic importance that have taken
place in China and Burma respectively, i.e., China
has cast away its semi-colonial status and Burin
its colonial status and both have become indepen-
dent and mutually friendly countries. The Bur-
mese Government has succeeded to the territory
formerly controlled by Britain, and the Union of
Burma has been established by combining the
various national autonomous states and Burma
proper, while our government has taken over the
territory under the jurisdiction of the Kuomin-
tang government. In dealing with this boundary
question, attention must be paid to these historical
changes, and the treaties signed in the past which
concern the boundary between China and Burma
must be treated in accordance with general in-
ternational practice. Only when we take all the
above-mentioned points into account can we use
historical data correctly and secure a fair and
reasonable settlement of the Sino-Burmese bound-
ary question.
The boundary question has a direct bearing
on the interests of the nationalities living in com-
pact communities on the Sino-Burmese borders.
Therefore, in tackling this question we must
specially take into account the interests of these
nationalities. We know that the boundary line
between two countries is often found dividing into
two parts a nationality living in compact com-
munities on the borders. This is the result of
historical development. On the various sections of
the defined boundary between China and Burma
and on the borders between China and other
countries we find people of the same nationality
living on both sides of the boundary line. So
when we solve the question of the undefined
boundary line between China and Burma, we must
realize beforehand that it will be hard to avoid
separating the nationalities concerned by the
boundary line. In view of this, it is all the more
necessary for us to take measures, in consultation
with the Burmese Government, to make the future
defined boundary a boundary of peace and friend-
ship, and further cement the close ties of the
people of the two countries living on the borders.
Fellow Deputies! After repeated contacts and
consultations the Chinese and Burmese Govern-
ments have arrived at a general agreement of
views on the boundary question in a spirit of
friendship and according to the five principles of
peaceful co-existence. We believe that when the
views of both sides on concrete problems are
brought into accord through continued negotia-
tions, the boundary question between China and
Burma will receive a comprehensive, fair and
reasonable settlement.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/09/13: CIA-RDP08001297R000100190007-6
2.8?
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/09/13: CIA-RDP08001297R000100190007-6
BURMA-YUNNAN FRONTIER CHINESE MAPS
98? 100?
26?
22?
ZOO
sti
(Z" tavgo
yitAyiria
A N
,???
17inglisczny
..??,??.t., ....?
KZ7V07-0. Ng ,
z_
0,_,.
Ae.n91.1.-ina
A.KOKANG SECTOR
Haenwi-Koharg frontier os rou9 hiy defined 1894.
Frontier dernatcafaci after 1897 Convention
British Line 1900
Maximum Chinese claim 1900
Line agreed 1941
MINIM X MEER x
MINIM MP MUM II AMIN
MM. ???111 Oa= ????? Alan
sumeasseare4OPPAPOR40
Chinese maps 1951
Chinese maps . 1954 on
onwars
d
KAcHN SECT
Ten9yueh Tootoifs line 1905-6... .....
Maximum Cl-iinese dolt-111905-6
Chinese Fastal Atlas 4936. .11
Chine_se rr?aps i954-19JS 11041.11116111
25622 8-56
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/09/13: CIA-RDP08001297R000100190007-6
RESEARCH DEPT: FO , Febr,lary,1956
28?
ze
24?
22?
GP0?DSS0-6234