Shanghai Transit Dispute Rekindles India China Tensions Over Arunachal Pradesh

A layover that sparked a diplomatic protest

An Indian citizen, Pema Wangjom Thongdok, says a routine transit stop in China turned into an 18 hour ordeal when border officers at Shanghai Pudong Airport refused to accept her Indian passport because it lists Arunachal Pradesh as her birthplace. She was traveling from London to Japan on 21 November. The episode has triggered a fresh exchange between New Delhi and Beijing over the status of the eastern Himalayan state.

India lodged a strong protest with China, describing the action as arbitrary and a breach of international air travel norms. The Ministry of External Affairs said the move also ran against China’s own policy that permits visa free airport transit for up to 24 hours for passengers of all nationalities. The ministry reaffirmed that Arunachal Pradesh is an integral and inalienable part of India, so its residents carry valid Indian passports.

China rejected the allegation of detention or harassment. Its Foreign Ministry said border inspection authorities applied the law in a fair way, took no compulsory measures, and ensured the traveler’s rights. Officials also said the airline provided meals and a place to rest. Beijing repeated its position that Arunachal, which it calls Zangnan or south Tibet, is Chinese territory.

The incident comes amid a careful thaw. Direct flights have restarted, senior leaders met in August, and the two sides have been working on patrol arrangements along the frontier. A single case at an airport may appear small, yet it touches a core sovereignty dispute and quickly becomes a test of the goodwill both capitals say they want to build.

Ms. Thongdok, who has lived in the United Kingdom for about 14 years, said she had transited Shanghai in the past without any issue. This time, she says, an officer separated her from the queue after spotting the place of birth in her passport.

What the traveler reported and how China responded

According to her account shared on social media and with Indian outlets, immigration personnel told her the passport was invalid because of the Arunachal birthplace entry. She says she was barred from boarding her onward flight to Japan despite carrying a valid visa and was kept in the transit area while her passport was withheld.

Describing taunts from officials, Ms. Thongdok said she was mocked about her identity.

They said, “Arunachal is not part of India.” They laughed and told me, “You should apply for a Chinese passport, you are Chinese, you are not Indian.”

Indian consular staff in Shanghai engaged with Chinese authorities and the airline, and she was allowed to continue her journey after about 18 hours. She later described the experience as humiliating and said she suffered financial loss because of missed bookings.

In Beijing, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning responded that the checks were lawful and non abusive, and that the individual’s lawful rights were fully protected. She said there was no detaining or harassing and that the airline had provided resting facilities and meals.

Mao Ning said border inspection authorities carried out checks in accordance with laws and regulations. She added that no compulsory measures were taken and that there was no so called detaining or harassing.

India’s response was sharp. Ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal called the action arbitrary and warned that such steps are most unhelpful when both sides are trying to normalize ties. He repeated that Arunachal Pradesh is an integral and inalienable part of India and said no denial from China can alter that fact.

Randhir Jaiswal said, “Arbitrary actions by China involving an Indian citizen from Arunachal Pradesh are most unhelpful toward efforts to build mutual trust and move toward normalization of bilateral relations.” He also said, “Arunachal Pradesh is an integral and inalienable part of India. No amount of denial by the Chinese side will change this indisputable reality.”

Why Arunachal Pradesh lies at the heart of the dispute

Arunachal Pradesh spans high mountains and valleys along a long de facto boundary known as the Line of Actual Control. India administers the state and holds elections there. China asserts a claim to it, using the term Zangnan and sometimes South Tibet, and says the British era McMahon Line that India treats as the frontier was never accepted by Beijing.

Borders and names

The border question dates to the early twentieth century and the 1914 Shimla talks, where British and Tibetan representatives drew the McMahon Line. China does not recognize that line. The two countries fought a brief war in 1962. While the contest over Arunachal dominates Indian debate, India also claims the Aksai Chin plateau to the northwest, an area that China has controlled since the 1960s and that connects Xinjiang and Tibet.

Recent flashpoints and paperwork

Despite confidence building talks, the frontier still erupts. In June 2020, soldiers from both sides clashed in the Galwan Valley in Ladakh. In late 2022, troops scuffled near Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh. The dispute also appears in documents. China has issued stapled visas to some residents of Arunachal Pradesh, a practice India rejects. New Delhi has protested Chinese attempts to rename places inside the state and stresses that creative naming does not change facts on the ground.

Arunachal is strategic and symbolic. It anchors India’s northeast and shares deep cultural links with Tibet. Tawang, where a major monastery sits, is the birthplace of the sixth Dalai Lama. For Beijing, control over the region connects directly to Tibet policy. For New Delhi, it touches sovereignty and the rights of more than a million Indian citizens.

What the rules say about airport transit and passports

China allows many travelers to transit its international airports without a visa for up to 24 hours, often within the airside area. Admission to transit is still subject to the decision of border inspection officers, who can restrict movement or refuse carriage in specific cases.

In most countries, the place of birth printed in a passport is a biographical record. It does not create or surrender a territorial claim. It is unusual for a traveler to be told that a passport is invalid because of a birthplace entry, particularly when the document is otherwise valid and machine readable.

India argues the Shanghai incident breached standards that aim to keep international transit smooth and also violated China’s own 24 hour transit rule. China disputes that view and says the process was lawful. The gap between those positions shows how a sovereignty dispute can filter into decisions at a check point.

Signals and stakes for India China relations

The two countries have tried to arrest a slide in relations after the 2020 crisis. Direct flights are back. Officials revived people centric exchanges and worked on patrol arrangements to reduce friction along the frontier. In August, Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited China and met President Xi Jinping, the first such visit in years. Both sides said they wanted partnership, not rivalry.

An airport case like this energizes domestic debate in India. The MEA said it raised the matter at a very high level. Opposition leaders urged the government to speak firmly to Beijing and stressed that the nationality and dignity of Indian citizens must never be questioned abroad.

Analysts caution that sovereignty disputes rarely fade with one diplomatic season. Praveen Donthi of the International Crisis Group described the episode as a reminder that the border issue remains intractable even during periods of outreach.

Praveen Donthi said, “This incident underlines how stubborn the border dispute is despite recent outreach. For Beijing, control over the region is tied to policy on Tibet. For India, it is a question of sovereignty.”

How airlines and travelers are caught in the middle

Airlines have little latitude at immigration checkpoints. If a border officer deems a document unacceptable, carriers are obliged to comply. That can leave passengers stranded in a transit zone, waiting for a resolution between consular staff, airline managers, and border officials. Ms. Thongdok says she missed her flight and was told to rebook in order to get her passport back.

Practical measures can reduce the risk of disruption. Travelers can confirm transit eligibility with the airline and with official immigration portals before booking, consider alternate routes that avoid sensitive transit points, keep consulate contacts handy, and leave buffer time between flights. None of these steps removes the sovereign discretion that states have at their borders, but preparation can help if a dispute arises.

What happens next

The case will likely be handled through established diplomatic channels. India will press its view that residents of Arunachal Pradesh face no special hurdles when they travel on Indian passports. China will keep reiterating its claim, including the use of the name Zangnan, even as it defends its border inspection procedures.

Both governments also have strong incentives to keep engagement on track. Trade ties are deep, flights have resumed after a long gap, and both sides have invested political capital in stabilizing the frontier. Preventing similar incidents from recurring would support that effort.

Key Points

• Indian citizen Pema Wangjom Thongdok says she was held about 18 hours in transit at Shanghai over an Arunachal Pradesh birthplace entry in her passport.
• India lodged a strong protest and said the action violated international air travel norms and China’s 24 hour transit rule.
• China said checks were lawful, denied detention or harassment, and said the traveler’s rights were protected.
• Arunachal Pradesh is administered by India, while China claims it as Zangnan or South Tibet and rejects the McMahon Line.
• Recent thaw efforts include resumed flights, leader level engagement, and patrol arrangements, yet the border remains tense.
• The episode shows how unresolved sovereignty disputes can spill into routine airport transit for ordinary travelers.