The recent incident involving Prema Thongdok, a woman from Arunachal Pradesh who was stopped at a China airport and subjected to rude behaviour, has brought fresh diplomatic friction between New Delhi and Beijing to the forefront. The Government of India, through the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), issued a strong demarche to China, expressing deep concern over the treatment of an Indian citizen and the alleged remarks made by the Chinese airport staff.

According to Ms. Thongdok, airport immigration officials and airline personnel behaved in an “unprofessional and rude” manner when she arrived at the airport to board her flight. In her account, she stated that the staff laughed, mocked her nationality, and made comments implying that Arunachal Pradesh was a part of Chinese territory. This behaviour, she added, caused her distress and raised questions about the discriminatory manner in which passengers from certain regions in India might be treated when travelling through Chinese checkpoints.

The matter quickly escalated into a diplomatic issue. India, which has consistently asserted that Arunachal Pradesh is an integral and inalienable part of the country, took the incident seriously, especially given China’s frequent political messaging regarding territorial claims. Through the demarche, India communicated that such incidents were unacceptable, violated norms of international travel, and reflected poorly on the professionalism expected from airport and immigration staff.

The MEA’s response underscores a familiar yet sensitive pattern. China has long claimed Arunachal Pradesh as part of its territory, referring to the region as “South Tibet.” This claim is strongly rejected by India. The issue often surfaces during high-level diplomatic exchanges, border negotiations, and even routine travel situations. The latest incident involving Ms. Thongdok fits into a broader context of China attempting to reinforce its claims through symbolic gestures or administrative behaviour—actions that India has repeatedly condemned.

In addition to the diplomatic protest, India demanded a clear explanation from China on why the passenger faced such treatment, and what steps would be taken to ensure it does not recur. Indian officials stressed that travellers must be treated with dignity at all international transit points, irrespective of their place of origin or nationality. Diplomats argued that this incident breached basic principles of conduct, where airport personnel must maintain impartiality and refrain from engaging in territorial or political disputes.

The incident also triggered widespread reactions within India, particularly from political leaders and civil society groups in the Northeast. Residents of Arunachal Pradesh frequently face challenges due to China’s refusal to recognise Indian passports issued in the state, sometimes issuing “stapled visas” instead. This latest harassment at an airport has renewed discussions about the need for stronger safeguards for Indian citizens travelling abroad, especially to nations with which India has unresolved geopolitical issues.

Beyond the immediate incident, the episode highlights the broader India–China tensions, especially along the eastern sector of the Line of Actual Control (LAC). Over the past few years, relations have deteriorated due to multiple standoffs, including the 2020 Galwan Valley clash and subsequent deployments on both sides. Although high-level talks have been held, trust remains fragile. Every new dispute—whether territorial, economic, or diplomatic—adds another layer of complexity to the relationship.

Ms. Thongdok’s testimony also brings forward the emotional and psychological dimension of geopolitical disputes. For many residents of Arunachal Pradesh, China’s claims are more than just lines on a map—they affect travel rights, identity, and dignity. When these tensions manifest in travel hubs, it adds to the sense of alienation and raises concerns about racism, stereotyping, and harassment based on geopolitical disputes rather than individual conduct.

Meanwhile, China has not yet issued an official statement clarifying its stance on the incident. Typically, Chinese authorities deny allegations of discriminatory behaviour and maintain that their airport checks follow standard procedures. However, in situations involving Arunachal Pradesh residents, the political angle is often impossible to separate from the administrative one.

Indian officials reiterated that international airports must remain neutral spaces, governed by universal rules of hospitality, protocol, and fairness. While border disputes may be long-standing, they should not translate into the mistreatment of travellers. India urged China to reinforce internal guidelines to prevent similar incidents and maintain professional standards.

Diplomats familiar with the matter suggest that India’s demarche is part of a calculated approach—firm, principled, and consistent with its longstanding policy. India aims to send a clear message without escalating the issue beyond necessity. Yet, the note of protest serves as a reminder that India will not tolerate disrespect toward its citizens or any attempt to undermine its territorial integrity, even in symbolic or casual contexts.

The national conversation also reflects on the need for better coordination between the MEA and citizens travelling to geopolitically sensitive locations. Travel advisories, awareness of potential issues, and channels for reporting misbehaviour abroad have become increasingly important. Cases involving individuals from border states, especially areas claimed by other countries, require extra vigilance and diplomatic sensitivity.

While the situation appears contained for now, the broader implications remain unresolved. As long as China continues to make territorial assertions over Arunachal Pradesh, such flashpoints will likely recur. Analysts note that these incidents, though seemingly minor, accumulate over time and deepen mistrust. They also feed into domestic political narratives, where issues of national pride, sovereignty, and security resonate strongly.

On a personal level, Ms. Thongdok’s experience sheds light on the challenges faced by residents of Northeastern states when travelling abroad. Issues of identity, recognition, and documentation often surface in unexpected places, revealing how geopolitical tensions can intrude into everyday experiences.

In conclusion, India’s strong demarche highlights the seriousness with which it views international treatment of its citizens, especially those from Arunachal Pradesh. The message is clear: harassment based on territorial disputes is unacceptable, and India will respond firmly to defend the dignity and rights of its people. Whether China chooses to address the concerns constructively or dismisses them remains to be seen, but the incident has already become another chapter in the long, complex history of India–China relations.

Join our Telegram Channel for Latest News and Regular Updates.

Start your Mutual Fund Journey  by Opening Free Account in Asset Plus.

Start your Stock Market Journey and Apply in IPO by Opening Free Demat Account in Choice Broking FinX.