KP Fabian, a former Indian diplomat, has articulated a forthright assessment of China's territorial ambitions towards India, particularly concerning Arunachal Pradesh.

In a recent interview with ANI on 24 December 2025, he underscored that Beijing harbours a long-standing expansionist mindset, viewing Arunachal Pradesh as one of the "five fingers of Tibet"—a notion rooted in historical Chinese strategic thinking.

Fabian drew attention to a fresh Pentagon report submitted to the US Congress, which explicitly flags China's claim over Arunachal Pradesh as part of its "core interests." He affirmed the report's accuracy, noting that such perceptions echo sentiments from the era of Chiang Kai-shek's government in China. 

"China doesn't respect the territorial integrity of India," Fabian stated bluntly, emphasising that this expansionist policy is not a recent development.

Despite these provocations, Fabian advocated for pragmatism in India's approach. He stressed the necessity of sustaining workable relations with China, particularly in domains like trade and investment, where India has persisted in engagement. This balanced stance reflects New Delhi's efforts to compartmentalise security concerns from economic imperatives.

The diplomat dismissed the novelty of the Pentagon's insights, remarking, "I don't think the Pentagon is telling us anything which we did not know." Nonetheless, he acknowledged the value in its formal articulation, especially the observation that China aims to obstruct deeper India-US ties. Fabian remained sanguine, asserting that Beijing "cannot prevent" such alignment, even if it attempts to do so.

The Pentagon document situates China's Arunachal claim within a grander narrative of national rejuvenation by 2049. It expands Beijing's non-negotiable "core interests" to encompass Taiwan, South China Sea disputes, the Senkaku Islands, and Arunachal Pradesh. Chinese leadership frames territorial unification—especially with Taiwan—as essential to this vision, backed by ambitions for a "world-class" military capable of decisive operations.

Underpinning this strategy is the Chinese Communist Party's (CCP) acute sensitivity to threats against its rule. The report highlights how Beijing labels dissent in Hong Kong, Xinjiang, Tibet, and Taiwan as separatist activities fomented by "external forces." This paranoia drives an assertive posture on sovereignty, security, and development.

Recent India-China border dynamics provide context for Fabian's remarks. In October 2024, an agreement facilitated disengagement from lingering standoff sites along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), paving the way for a Xi-Modi sideline meeting at the BRICS Summit. This has ushered in monthly high-level dialogues on border management, alongside proposals for direct flights, visa easing, and people-to-people exchanges.

The Pentagon assesses that China seeks to leverage this de-escalation to stabilise bilateral ties and curb US-India convergence. Yet, it anticipates persistent mutual distrust, constraining the relationship's scope. India, wary of Beijing's intentions, is likely to maintain vigilance amid these overtures.

Fabian's commentary aligns with broader geopolitical scrutiny of China's neighbourhood policy. His reference to Arunachal as a "finger of Tibet" evokes Mao Zedong's infamous analogy, where Tibet represents the palm and adjacent territories the fingers—a metaphor that has fuelled decades of friction. Arunachal Pradesh, constitutionally an integral part of India, remains a flashpoint, with China dubbing it "South Tibet" and issuing "standard maps" to assert claims.

India has consistently rebuffed these assertions, with official statements affirming Arunachal's inalienable status. Infrastructure push in the region, including roads, bridges, and airfields under the Vibrant Villages Programme, signals New Delhi's resolve to bolster border preparedness. Fabian's endorsement of pragmatic engagement echoes this multi-pronged strategy: firm deterrence paired with selective cooperation.

The timing of Fabian's remarks is poignant, coinciding with ongoing LAC patrolling arrangements post-2020 Galwan clashes. While disengagement progress is notable, full resolution eludes, with buffer zones and verification mechanisms still under negotiation. The Pentagon's input reinforces Western allies' shared concerns, potentially amplifying Quad dynamics where India plays a pivotal role.

Fabian's career lends weight to his views. A retired Indian Foreign Service officer, he served in key postings including Moscow, Tehran, and Geneva, amassing expertise in Eurasian affairs. His public commentary often dissects South Asian geopolitics with nuance, as seen in prior analyses of Russia-Ukraine impacts, Bangladesh unrest, and Nepal's map controversies—all featured in ANI coverage.

This episode underscores enduring India-China tensions amid global flux. As Beijing prioritises rejuvenation, New Delhi navigates a delicate equilibrium: safeguarding sovereignty while harnessing economic interdependencies. Fabian's call for realism without naivety encapsulates this imperative, urging vigilance against expansionism while preserving channels for dialogue.

The Pentagon report, meanwhile, signals heightened US scrutiny of China's playbook. By linking Arunachal to broader "core interests," it spotlights Beijing's salami-slicing tactics across frontiers. For India, such validations bolster diplomatic leverage, particularly in forums like the UN where territorial integrity remains sacrosanct.

In sum, KP Fabian's observations crystallise a timeless truth: China's territorial worldview clashes with India's red lines. Yet, his endorsement of calibrated engagement offers a roadmap—resolute defence paired with strategic patience—amid an arc of instability from the Himalayas to the Indo-Pacific.

Based On ANI Report