China Power | Diplomacy | South Asia

Shipki La and the Battle Over the History of China-India Trade

The Chinese narrative attempts to erase the independent agency Tibet exercised before 1951, framing Shipki La as a historical link between China and India (not Tibet and India).

An illustration depicting the Shipki Pass, drawn in 1856.

After a six-year hiatus, the China-India border trade via Shipki Pass, a 3,930-meter pass in Himachal Pradesh’s Kinnaur district, resumed on August 1, 2026. After the 2020 Galwan military standoff, the border trade from this pass, often called the “Gateway to Tibet,” was suspended. With limited operations and economic scope but significant political symbolism, the resumption of border trade has also rejuvenated interest in the competing legitimacy narratives over the Tibet question. 

According to China’s state-affiliated think tanks and media, border trade via the Shipki L Pass dates to the 7th to 9th centuries when the Tubo Empire reigned over the plateau. China frames trade along this route as a sub-set of the Silk Road. Between the 14th and early 20th centuries, Chinese tellings claim Tibet as a commercial bridge between China and South Asia, while in the late 18th century, the Qing Dynasty of China took measures to standardize trade activities between Tibet and its neighboring countries, for “better management” of Tibet. 

As per the Chinese accounts, the “peaceful liberation” of Tibet in 1951 and the signing of the Panchsheel Pact led to the abolishment of India’s trade  “privileges” in Tibet and the formalization of a new paradigm for Indo-Tibetan trade. 

China claims to have set Sino-Indian border trade free from unequal terms set by colonial rule, ushering in an era of normalized development. Cut to the present: the reopening of Shipki La Pass, despite the minuscule trade volume, is received by Chinese media as a welcome move toward improving China-India strategic ties. 

Every aspect of the Chinese reading of history sidelines the Tibetan side of the story. For starters, what the Chinese narrative misses is the independent agency Tibet exercised before 1951. 

By contrast, Tibetan scholars characterize Shipki Pass as a major route for trade and cultural exchange between Indian territories and Tibet, independent of Chinese involvement. Consistent with Tibet’s claim to political and commercial autonomy, historical records describe Shipki Pass as a crucial route connecting Tibet with the Kingdom of Bushahar, Ladakh, and Kashmir. The exchange across the regions, involving a variety of products, was governed by gamgya, a traditional informal oath of mutual trust that was respected and maintained across generations. 

However, with the development of modern state infrastructure on either side of Shipki Pass and growing geopolitical disputes culminating in the Sino-Indian War in 1962, the centuries-old trade........

© The Diplomat