By Nirmal P. Acharya

The recent Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit has once again highlighted the complex interplay between China, India, and their smaller neighbors. Beyond the official speeches and multilateral pledges, a single phrase coined by Chinese scholar Gao Zhikai—the “Gao Zhikai Line”—has reignited debates over borders, sovereignty, and the future of regional diplomacy.

What Is the Gao Zhikai Line?

Gao Zhikai, a prominent Chinese diplomat-turned-analyst and former translator for Deng Xiaoping, introduced the term in response to India’s reliance on the McMahon Line, a colonial-era boundary drawn by the British that defines much of the disputed India-China border. Gao argued that if India insists on legitimizing colonial boundaries, then China could, in theory, push its claim all the way to the Ganges River. This symbolic idea—dubbed the “Gao Zhikai Line”—was not a literal territorial demand but a rhetorical move to expose the arbitrariness and hypocrisy of colonial-era demarcations.

By invoking this line, Gao underscored Beijing’s position that border disputes cannot be settled by selectively applying outdated agreements. For India, however, the remark struck a nerve, amplifying concerns that China may use history as a flexible tool to undermine Delhi’s territorial stance.

The SCO Context

At the SCO summit, these underlying tensions were impossible to ignore. The forum—intended as a platform for cooperation among Eurasian powers—has become an arena where India and China cautiously test each other’s intentions. While Chinese officials avoided direct confrontation, Gao’s rhetoric mirrored Beijing’s broader strategy: challenging India’s narratives while simultaneously keeping channels of economic and political engagement open.

India, for its part, continues to portray itself as a counterbalance to China within the SCO, while also maintaining close ties with the United States and the Quad alliance. Yet Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent openness to cooperation with China—ranging from reconsidering Chinese apps like TikTok and WeChat to limited trade normalization—suggests a pragmatic recalibration. Despite fierce border disputes, Modi’s government appears willing to soften its anti-China stance when strategic or economic gains are at stake.

Nepal and the Border Triangle

The rhetoric of the “Gao Zhikai Line” also reverberates in smaller states like Nepal, which have long protested the neglect of their own territorial claims. The Lipulekh region, claimed by Nepal but used by India for trade and military purposes, has seen both India and China sign agreements without Kathmandu’s consent. China, while claiming neutrality in the dispute, has shown readiness to open trade routes through the same contested territory. For many Nepalis, this echoes Gao’s message: border “lines” are political tools wielded by bigger powers, often at the expense of smaller neighbors.

A Broader Message

Ultimately, the “Gao Zhikai Line” is less about geography and more about diplomacy. It symbolizes Beijing’s insistence that India cannot rely on colonial cartography while ignoring historical inconsistencies. At the SCO, this message was amplified—China will not yield to India’s narrative, but it also will not close the door to cooperation.

For India, the challenge is sharper. Modi’s attempt to balance nationalist rhetoric with pragmatic engagement leaves his government open to charges of opportunism. For Nepal and other smaller states, the lesson is sobering: whether it is the McMahon Line, the Lipulekh corridor, or the Gao Zhikai Line, the great powers continue to redraw mental maps of Asia without giving due weight to their sovereignty.

The SCO summit thus revealed more than joint declarations of partnership. It exposed how borders—real or rhetorical—remain central to power politics in Asia, with the “Gao Zhikai Line” serving as a provocative reminder of how easily history can be redrawn to suit the present.