Chinese Scholar Claims Bihar As Chinese Territory

A provocative claim attributed to Chinese political analyst Victor Gao, citing a now-deleted statement by Chinese diplomat Gao Zhikai, has ignited a firestorm of reactions in India. Gao reportedly suggested that China should reject the McMahon Line and lay claim to territories extending up to the Ganga River, including parts of Bihar, as part of an expansive territorial narrative. The claim, which surfaced on Chinese platforms and was later removed, has been met with a mix of amusement and indignation in India, with many accusing China of fabricating historical justifications to support baseless territorial ambitions. This incident adds to ongoing tensions over China’s claims on Arunachal Pradesh, Tawang, and Ladakh-regions India asserts were never under Chinese control.

According to reports, Victor Gao, Vice President of the Beijing-based Center for China and Globalization, referenced a statement by diplomat Gao Zhikai, who allegedly argued that the McMahon Line-a 1914 boundary established under the Simla Accord between British India and Tibetan representatives-is illegitimate. The claim, which surfaced on Chinese social media platforms, went further, suggesting that China’s “ancestral territory” extends south to the Ganga River, encompassing parts of Bihar and other northern Indian states. This so-called “Victor Gao Line,” as dubbed by some Chinese netizens, was reportedly deleted from platforms like Weibo, but not before it was widely circulated and picked up by Indian media and social media users.

The McMahon Line, which defines much of the India-China border in Arunachal Pradesh, has long been a point of contention. China rejects its legitimacy, arguing it was a product of British colonial overreach and Tibetan collusion, claiming over 90,000 square kilometers of territory, including Arunachal Pradesh, which China refers to as “Zangnan.” The assertion that Chinese territory extends to the Ganga, however, marks a dramatic escalation in rhetoric, prompting accusations of historical revisionism and propaganda aimed at manipulating domestic sentiment in China.

In India, the claim has been met with a mix of incredulity and derision. Social media platforms, particularly X, have been abuzz with reactions, with users mocking the absurdity of the “Victor Gao Line.” One X post stated, “India is sitting on Chinese land. Gao Zhikai is ready to come with a new Gao Zhikai line that all lands north of Ganga will be part of China just like how Zangnan is claimed by Colonial brit based on their whims”. Others have labeled the claim as evidence of China’s “pathological lying,” pointing to a pattern of fabricating historical narratives to justify territorial ambitions.

Indian analysts and officials have dismissed the claim as baseless, emphasizing that regions like Bihar, Arunachal Pradesh, Tawang, and Ladakh have no historical connection to ancient or modern China. The Maurya and Gupta empires, which flourished in the Ganga basin, predate any Chinese influence in the region, and historical records show no evidence of Chinese control over these areas. Arunachal Pradesh, for instance, has deep cultural and historical ties to India, with Tawang being a significant center of Tibetan Buddhism, further undermining China’s claims.

Arunachal Pradesh, for instance, has deep cultural and historical ties to India,with Tawang being a significant center of Tibetan Buddhism, further underminingC hina’s claims.

The Indian Ministry of External Affairs has not issued an official response to the specific claim, but sources indicate that New Delhi views such rhetoric as part of China’s broader strategy to provoke and distract from ongoing border disputes, particularly in eastern Ladakh, where tensions have persisted since the 2020 Galwan Valley clash. The claim comes amid other provocative statements by Victor Gao, including warnings about China weaponizing the Brahmaputra River or standing by Pakistan in conflicts with India.

China’s rejection of the McMahon Line and its claims on Arunachal Pradesh and Ladakh are grounded in a selective interpretation of history, often citing “ancient” or “ancestral” rights that lack substantiation under international law. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has previously noted that the notion of “historical consolidation” is controversial and cannot override established principles like uti possidetis juris, which supports the boundaries of newly independent states based on colonial delineations. China’s renaming of places in Arunachal Pradesh and its construction of “xiaokang” villages near the Line of Actual Control (LAC) are seen as attempts to assert sovereignty through symbolic and physical means.

The claim extending to the Ganga, however, represents a new level of audacity, with no historical or legal basis. Indian scholars argue that such assertions are designed to stoke nationalist sentiment within China, particularly among online audiences, where figures like Gao are celebrated as “diplomatic fighters” for their aggressive rhetoric. The deletion of the statement suggests an attempt to temper international backlash, but its initial circulation indicates a deliberate effort to test reactions or bolster domestic propaganda.

The timing of the claim is significant, coming amidst heightened India-China tensions following Operation Sindoor in May 2025, a brief but intense India-Pakistan conflict in which China reportedly provided intelligence support to Pakistan. Gao’s earlier statements, warning India against disrupting Pakistan’s water supply from the Indus River and hinting at retaliatory measures on the Brahmaputra, reflect China’s strategy of leveraging regional alliances to pressure India. The Ganga claim, while seemingly far-fetched, aligns with this pattern of provocative posturing, potentially aimed at distracting from ongoing LAC disengagement talks or asserting dominance in the Indo-Pacific.

Indian strategic analysts view the claim as part of China’s broader “salami-slicing” strategy, incrementally escalating territorial demands to keep India on the defensive. Posts on X have expressed concern that such rhetoric could embolden China to open new fronts in the border dispute, particularly in sensitive areas like Arunachal Pradesh. However, others argue that the claim’s absurdity undermines China’s credibility, with one user noting, “Chinese are pathological liars, inventing new areas to claim with bogus historical references.”

Join Us On Social Media:-

Contact Us:-