01The Claim and the Line
The legal and historical record of the McMahon Line, the 1962 war, and the contest over maps, names and memory. What is settled, what is contested, and what can be verified on the ground.
New Delhi · 1–2 February 2027
Sovereignty, stability and the Eastern Himalaya.
A two-day Track-II convening on the Arunachal Pradesh dispute, the character of Chinese pressure, the global cost of a China–India conflict, and the terms of a durable stability.
01 The moment
A frontier that no longer stays local.
Sovereignty, Stability and the Eastern Himalaya
The Line of Actual Control is a disputed frontier of about 3,400 km between two nuclear-armed states. Since 2020 it has stopped being a background condition and become an active instrument of pressure.
Arunachal Pradesh sits at the centre of that change. China claims the entire state and has never accepted the McMahon Line; India administers it as an integral part of the Union. The dispute is old. What is new is the scale of infrastructure, the pace of administrative change, and the use of trade, technology and water as instruments of pressure — with intent stated in some cases and inferred in others.
The Uttara Dialogue exists to examine that shift without exaggeration. It is designed to bring legal scholars, defence analysts, economists and diplomats into one room for two days, to test India's position against its strongest critics, and to ask what a stable outcome would actually require.
Sovereignty is not a bargaining chip. Stability is not a concession.
Conference framing — not a quotation from any government
2
Days
12
Sessions and forums
4
Thematic tracks
1
Published report
02Themes
Four ways into the question.
The programme moves from the legal record, through the instruments of pressure and their global consequences, to the mechanisms that could produce stability.
02Pressure and Consequence
How pressure is applied short of war, what it does to the frontier and the wider Himalayan arc, and where deterrence holds or fails.
03The Wider War
Why a Himalayan border dispute is now a global economic and strategic event: trade dependence, critical minerals, shipping, energy and the forums that are meant to manage it.
04The Way Out
Verification, confidence-building, de-risking and the diplomacy that could make escalation irrational. What missions, think tanks and governments can realistically do next.
03Programme
Two days, twelve sessions, one argument.
Ten sessions and two discussion forums. Times are indicative until the venue is confirmed. Each session brief states what is documented, what is credibly reported, what is contested and what is rumoured. The forums are held under the Chatham House Rule.
1–2 February 2027 · New Delhi
Day One
Monday, 1 February 2027
The Claim and the Line
-
09:30Registration Registration and welcome coffee 60 min
-
10:30Plenary 60 min
The Eastern Himalaya in the Indo-Pacific Century
Framing
Abstract, questions and speaker profile
The opening plenary sets the terms of the two days: why a boundary dispute in one Indian state has become a test of the regional order, what this conference treats as documented, credibly reported, contested or rumoured, and what remains genuinely open. It frames the four themes and the questions the closing session must answer.
Guiding questions
- Why does Arunachal Pradesh matter beyond the bilateral relationship?
- What has changed in the regional balance since 2020?
- Which assumptions about China's intentions are evidence, and which are inference?
- What would a stable outcome look like in ten years?
Speaker profile sought
A senior Indian strategic-affairs voice with direct China policy experience, paired with an international chair.
-
12:00Panel 75 min
The Line and the Law: McMahon, 1962 and the Cartographic War
The Claim and the Line
Abstract, questions and speaker profile
The legal foundations of the dispute, examined without slogans: the 1914 Simla Convention, which China initialled but did not sign, the McMahon Line, China's grounds for rejecting both, the 1962 war and its aftermath, and the contemporary politics of renaming. The session separates what the record establishes from what international law leaves open.
Guiding questions
- What did the 1914 convention actually establish, and what did it not?
- On what grounds does Beijing reject the McMahon Line, and how strong is that argument?
- What did 1962 change on the ground and in the record?
- Does unilateral renaming have legal effect, or only political effect?
Speaker profile sought
An international lawyer, a historian of modern China, and a Chinese-reading discussant.
-
13:15Break Lunch 60 min
-
14:30Panel 75 min
On the Ground: Infrastructure, Incursions and the LAC in Arunachal
The Claim and the Line
Abstract, questions and speaker profile
What can actually be verified along the frontier: road and village construction, dual-use infrastructure, patrol patterns, and the disputed geography of the Line of Actual Control. The session separates what commercial imagery can show from what is reported, contested or rumoured, and asks what monitoring would need to look like.
Guiding questions
- What has changed physically along the LAC since 2020?
- Which claims about encroachment are documented, and by whom?
- How should India verify and publicise frontier changes?
- What would an effective monitoring regime require?
Speaker profile sought
A remote-sensing or defence-geography specialist, a retired frontier commander, and a journalist with field experience.
-
16:00Panel 75 min
The Himalayan Arc: Tibet, Doklam and the Eastern Frontier
Pressure and Consequence
Abstract, questions and speaker profile
Arunachal is one segment of a wider arc. This session examines Tibet's status and its use in boundary claims, the Doklam standoff and the Sikkim sector, and the eastern arc that runs from those precedents to Arunachal. It asks how events at one point shape expectations at another, without assuming that pressure moves mechanically along the frontier.
Guiding questions
- How does the Tibet question function inside the boundary dispute?
- What did Doklam establish about the Sikkim sector, and what did it leave unresolved?
- Is the Himalayan arc a single strategic theatre or several?
- Where else along the arc has infrastructure changed the terms of the standoff?
Speaker profile sought
A Himalayan specialist, a China–India border scholar, and a Tibetan affairs analyst.
-
17:15Discussion forum 60 min
Discussion Forum I: Sovereignty on a Contested Frontier
Pressure and Consequence
Abstract, questions and speaker profile
A moderated, off-record forum on the hardest question: what is negotiable, what is not, and whether any formula can reconcile sovereignty with stability. Participation is limited to invited delegates; no attributions without consent.
Guiding questions
- Is there any space between legal maximalism and a procedural modus vivendi?
- What does settlement mean for a state India administers?
- Can sovereignty be bracketed while practical arrangements proceed?
- What would each side need in order to move?
Speaker profile sought
A senior retired diplomat as chair; no formal panellists.
-
19:00Reception Welcome reception 90 min
Day Two
Tuesday, 2 February 2027
The Wider War and the Way Out
-
10:15Panel 75 min
Economic Pressure: Trade, Rare-Earth Magnets and the Limits of Interdependence
The Wider War
Abstract, questions and speaker profile
Economic pressure is cheaper than military pressure and harder to attribute. This session maps India's dependence on Chinese rare-earth magnets and processed critical minerals, active pharmaceutical ingredients, electronics and machinery, reviews the use of export controls as statecraft, and asks how far de-risking can go without a self-defeating decoupling.
Guiding questions
- Where is India's exposure concentrated, and how quickly can it shift?
- How effective have Chinese export controls been as instruments of pressure?
- What is the difference between de-risking and decoupling?
- Which vulnerabilities are shared with partners, and which are uniquely Indian?
Speaker profile sought
A trade economist, a supply-chain specialist, and an industry representative.
-
11:45Panel 75 min
The Wider War: Supply Chains, Energy and the Price of Disruption
The Wider War
Abstract, questions and speaker profile
A China–India conflict would not stay bilateral in its economic effects. This session traces how a Himalayan war becomes a global price shock through shipping, insurance, energy, semiconductors and critical minerals, and asks which economies would be hit first and hardest.
Guiding questions
- What are the transmission channels from a border war to global markets?
- Which third countries are most exposed, and do they know it?
- What did 2020 teach about the elasticity of supply chains?
- What would systemic disruption look like, and what would contain it?
Speaker profile sought
A macroeconomist, a shipping or insurance analyst, and an energy-security researcher.
-
13:00Break Lunch 60 min
-
14:00Panel 60 min
Multilateralism and the Global South: UN, BRICS, SCO and the Quad
The Wider War
Abstract, questions and speaker profile
India sits in forums that include China and forums that do not. This session assesses what each can actually deliver on a sovereignty dispute, why most Global South states have no public position on Arunachal, and whether coalition-building can change Beijing's calculus without turning the dispute into a bloc confrontation.
Guiding questions
- Does any multilateral body have jurisdiction, and can any of them act without China's consent?
- What is the Quad for, and what is it not for?
- Why do most Global South states have no public position on Arunachal?
- Does multilateralising the dispute help or harden it?
Speaker profile sought
A multilateral practitioner, a Global South scholar, and a regional-security analyst.
-
15:30Panel 75 min
Deterrence and Stability: Capabilities, Partners and the Nuclear Shadow
Pressure and Consequence
Abstract, questions and speaker profile
The conventional balance, India's infrastructure and procurement, the role of partners, and the nuclear threshold that disciplines everything. The session works up an escalation ladder and asks which rungs are stable, which are not, and what signals would keep a crisis below the top.
Guiding questions
- What does the conventional balance actually look like along the LAC?
- Where are the escalation thresholds, and how visible are they?
- What does declared no-first-use mean in a limited-war scenario?
- Which partnerships strengthen stability, and which invite risk?
Speaker profile sought
A defence analyst, a nuclear-strategy scholar, and a former service officer.
-
16:30Plenary 45 min
Friends and Partners: What Missions and Think Tanks Can Actually Do
The Way Out
Abstract, questions and speaker profile
A practical session for the institutions in the room. What diplomatic missions and Track-II institutions have actually contributed, where their record is thin, how evidence travels between capitals, and where quiet coordination is more useful than public statements.
Guiding questions
- What is the realistic added value of Track-II on this file?
- How should missions coordinate without forming a bloc?
- What research would actually change a decision in Beijing or Delhi?
- What should this conference do next, concretely?
Speaker profile sought
Two heads of mission or senior diplomats and a think-tank director.
-
17:45Discussion forum 60 min
Discussion Forum II: From Disengagement to a Modus Vivendi
The Way Out
Abstract, questions and speaker profile
A working forum on mechanisms: verification, buffer zones, hotlines, incident-prevention protocols and sequencing. The aim is not a treaty but a set of arrangements that make accidental escalation less likely and intentional escalation more costly.
Guiding questions
- Which existing confidence-building measures are worth reviving, and which are dead?
- What verification is technically feasible on this terrain?
- What sequence of reciprocal steps is realistic?
- What could a joint monitoring cell verify, and with what mandate?
Speaker profile sought
A retired ambassador as chair, with technical and military advisers in the room.
-
18:30Plenary 45 min
Closing Plenary and Report Release: An Eight-Year Agenda to 2034
The Way Out
Abstract, questions and speaker profile
The closing session presents the conference report and tests its recommendations against the room. It identifies what can be done in one year, what requires the full eight years to 2034, and what must be left to governments.
Guiding questions
- Which three recommendations are actionable within twelve months?
- What would make a future conference unnecessary?
- How should the report be used by missions and think tanks?
- What did the two days change in the analysis?
Speaker profile sought
The conference chair and the lead author.
04 The Report
Version 1.0
The Eastern Himalaya and the Terms of Stability
Arunachal Pradesh, Chinese pressure, and the global consequences of a China–India conflict
The conference report sets out the legal and historical record of the Arunachal Pradesh dispute, states India's position and China's position in their own terms, documents the instruments of pressure used since 2020, grading each as documented, reported or contested, and estimates the economic consequences of a wider conflict. It closes with scenarios for 2027–2032 and a sequenced eight-year agenda to 2034 covering verification, confidence-building, deterrence and economic resilience. Every factual claim is attributed to a dated source, and single-source claims are flagged; contested claims are labelled as claims.
Contents
- 01 Introduction: a border dispute as a test of order
- 02 The line and the law
- 03 India's position
- 04 China's position and strategy
- 05 The pressure record, 2020–2026
- 06 Economic exposure and global spillover
- 07 Deterrence, escalation and the nuclear shadow
- 08 Scenarios, 2027–2032
- 09 Recommendations and an eight-year agenda to 2034
- 10 Conclusion
05Participation
Who is in the room.
Attendance is by invitation and capped at 120–150 participants. The mix is deliberate: missions, researchers, lawyers, defence analysts, economists and a small number of journalists.
120–150 invited participants
-
Diplomatic missions
Ambassadors, deputy chiefs of mission and political counsellors accredited to New Delhi, together with visiting China and Indo-Pacific desks where nominations permit.
By letter to the mission. Each mission may nominate up to three participants.
-
Think tanks and research institutions
Institutions working on China, the Himalaya, Indo-Pacific security, trade and supply chains, in India and abroad.
By letter to the head of institution, with a request to nominate one senior researcher and one early-career researcher.
-
Academia
International lawyers, historians, geographers and economists with published work on the dispute or its consequences.
By individual invitation following a proposal or nomination.
-
Industry and trade bodies
Firms and associations with exposure to critical minerals, pharmaceuticals, electronics, energy and shipping.
By invitation to a limited number of chief economists and supply-chain leads.
-
Journalists
Invited journalists covering diplomacy, defence and the economy. Selected sessions are on the record; forums are not.
By invitation. Recording is permitted only where the chair states that a session is on the record.
06Speakers
A curated programme, not a cast list.
The roster is built session by session, against the question each session has to answer. Proposals are open now; no participation is confirmed until a formal letter of invitation has been issued.
Tell us who should be in the room, or put yourself forward. Proposals are reviewed by the secretariat and the session chairs.
Version 1.0
The speaker roster will be announced on a dated schedule to be published by the secretariat. The secretariat is inviting proposals from scholars, practitioners and officials speaking in a personal capacity. No participation is confirmed until a formal letter of invitation has been issued.
Submit a speaker proposalWe read every proposal. Because the programme is curated, we cannot accept all of them, and we do not provide feedback on individual submissions.
What the secretariat looks for
- Direct scholarly or practitioner expertise on the session's question, not general commentary.
- Willingness to engage the strongest version of the opposing argument.
- A record of published or operational work that can be cited.
- Availability for the full session, including a pre-conference briefing call.
- For serving officials: clearance to participate in a personal capacity, where required.
07Venue
New Delhi, in February.
A single-track plenary format. The venue will be announced with the first invitation round; access and travel guidance will be published at the same time.
In-person, by invitation
New DelhiIndia
To be announced
Version 1.0The Uttara Dialogue will be held in New Delhi in a single-track plenary format. The venue will be announced with the first invitation round; access and travel guidance will be published at the same time.
- Format
- In-person, by invitation
- Participants
- 120–150 invited participants
Getting there
- Location
- The venue will be announced with the first invitation round.
- Arrival
- Arrival and local transfer guidance will be published with the venue confirmation.
- Assistance
- Participants requiring assistance with travel or access should write to the secretariat; requirements will be accommodated.
Before you travel
- Participants requiring a visa should apply once a formal letter of invitation has been issued. The secretariat does not process visas.
- Security arrangements will be published with the venue confirmation.
- The secretariat will publish an access statement with the venue confirmation and will accommodate specific requirements. Please tell the secretariat about any requirement when you confirm attendance.
08Questions
What to expect.
Practical answers for missions, institutions and individuals considering a proposal.
What is the Uttara Dialogue?
A two-day Track-II convening on the dispute over Arunachal Pradesh, the character of Chinese pressure toward India, the global consequences of a China–India conflict, and the terms of a durable stability. It is built around a published report, released in Version 1.0 at the event, and a curated programme of ten sessions and two discussion forums.
Who is convening it?
An independent conference secretariat based in New Delhi. The Uttara Dialogue is not a government event and does not carry the name, crest or authority of any government, ministry, consulate or parent organisation. Institutional partners, if any, will be listed only after written agreement.
Who can attend?
Attendance is by invitation and is limited to 120–150 participants: diplomatic missions, think tanks, academia, a small number of industry representatives, and invited journalists. The speaker proposal form is open, but submitting a proposal does not register you for the event.
Can I propose a speaker, or myself?
Yes. Use the proposal form on this site. Include a session preference, a proposed title, a short abstract, a biography and a résumé. Proposals are reviewed by the secretariat and the session chairs. Serving officials should confirm that they may participate in a personal capacity.
Is there a registration fee?
No. There is no fee to attend or to propose a speaker. Participants cover their own travel and accommodation. The secretariat does not arrange visas, though it can issue a letter confirming an invitation once participation is confirmed.
Is the event on the record?
Plenaries and panels are on the record unless the chair says otherwise. Both discussion forums are held under the Chatham House Rule, and the only published output from the forums is the chair's summary, with no attribution without consent. Recording is permitted only where the chair states that a session is on the record.
How is the report sourced?
Every factual claim is attributed to a dated source; single-source claims are flagged. Where sources disagree, the disagreement is shown. Contested claims are labelled as claims by the party making them, not presented as established fact. The report's bibliography is published with it.
Is there a code of conduct, and what is confidential?
All participants will be bound by a code of conduct, published with the confirmation pack. It will require courtesy in debate, respect for the Chatham House Rule in the two discussion forums, and consent before any remark is attributed to a speaker or institution. Concerns may be raised in confidence with the secretariat.
How does press accreditation work?
Press participation is by invitation. Journalists covering diplomacy, defence and the economy may write to the secretariat with their details and their accreditation status; the secretariat will confirm whether a place is available and the terms of coverage. Recording is permitted only where the chair states that a session is on the record. The forums are not for attribution.
What happens to the information I submit?
It is used only to assess your proposal. Résumés are stored outside the public web directory with randomised filenames and are available only to the secretariat. Unsuccessful applications are deleted after twelve months. We do not sell data, run third-party analytics, or share your details with other institutions. You can request deletion by writing to the secretariat.
Is the venue accessible?
The venue will be announced with the first invitation round. The secretariat will publish an access statement at the same time and will accommodate specific requirements on request. Write to the secretariat before the event.
Will the event be livestreamed?
No. The Uttara Dialogue is an in-person convening. Selected plenary and panel material will be published after the event, and the report will be freely available online.
09 Speaker proposals
Put a name forward.
Tell us who should be in the room, or put yourself forward. The secretariat reads every proposal with the session chairs, and aims to reply within ten working days.
We read every proposal. Because the programme is curated, we cannot accept all of them, and we do not provide feedback on individual submissions.
What happens next
- You submit a proposal with a session preference, an abstract and a curriculum vitae.
- The secretariat and the session chair review it against the published criteria.
- If the proposal is accepted, we issue a formal letter of invitation with logistics.
The secretariat aims to reply to proposals within ten working days. Please do not send classified or sensitive material through this website.
Privacy
We collect only what is needed to assess a speaker proposal: your name, contact details, institution, proposal and résumé. We do not sell data, do not use third-party analytics, and delete unsuccessful applications after twelve months.
Data retained for 12 months. Notice updated 2026-11-03.
10 Secretariat
Correspondence.
For invitations, proposals, accessibility requirements and press enquiries, write to the secretariat.
The secretariat aims to reply to proposals within ten working days. Please do not send classified or sensitive material through this website.
- [email protected]
- Address
- New Delhi, India
- Privacy
- Data retained for 12 months. Notice updated 2026-11-03.