An Arunachal Pradesh woman, Prema (Pema) Wangjom Thongdok, has alleged that Chinese immigration officials harassed and detained her for nearly eighteen hours at Shanghai Pudong International Airport during a transit stop on November 21. She was travelling from London to Japan with a scheduled three-hour layover when, according to her account, airport authorities refused to recognise her Indian passport because it listed Arunachal Pradesh as her birthplace. The officials allegedly told her that the passport was “invalid” since “Arunachal Pradesh is part of China,” and went so far as to say she should apply for a Chinese passport instead.
What China conveniently ignored is that Arunachal Pradesh borders Tibet (historically and culturally) and from India’s standpoint, it does not border ‘China’. India recognizes the frontier as the McMahon Line, separating Arunachal from Tibet, not from mainland China. The Chinese claim is a political assertion, not a geographical reality accepted by India.
Thongdok says airport authorities confiscated her passport, denied her boarding on her valid connecting flight to Japan, and left her with inadequate food and no information. She also alleges that immigration staff and China Eastern Airlines personnel mocked her, laughing as they insisted she was Chinese “because Arunachal is China.” Eventually, after she contacted the Indian Consulate through a friend in the UK, consular officials intervened, provided food, and attempted to resolve the standoff. She was reportedly allowed to leave only after purchasing a fresh China Eastern Airlines ticket, suffering financial losses from missed flights.
The Indian government lodged a strong demarche with China in both Beijing and New Delhi, calling the incident a breach of international aviation norms under the Chicago and Montreal Conventions. Officials described China’s actions as “needless hurdles” that obstruct the fragile process of restoring bilateral normalcy. Her family in Arunachal Pradesh characterised the episode as deeply humiliating and urged the Indian government to press for accountability and compensation.
The incident illustrates a broader pattern of China using bureaucratic levers to advance its territorial narrative. By rejecting her passport purely because her birthplace was listed as Arunachal Pradesh, Chinese officials effectively turned an immigration counter into a stage for geopolitical theatre. If Thongdok’s account is accurate, ideology, not immigration protocol, drove the interaction.
Many in India have ridiculed China’s behaviour as petty and insecure, noting that detaining a lone traveller in a transit lounge is an absurd way to assert a territorial claim. The insistence that an Indian citizen apply for a Chinese passport, delivered with derision, resembles an overzealous border drama rather than legitimate statecraft. It is difficult to miss the irony: a government that claims global power prestige apparently feels compelled to validate its maps by bullying passengers at airport counters.
Beneath the spectacle, however, lies a serious concern. The arbitrary detention of a civilian traveller, denial of basic facilities, and coercion to book a specific airline raise troubling questions about China’s willingness to pressure individuals from a disputed region. For citizens of Arunachal Pradesh, the incident underscores how China’s political assertions can intrude even into international transit zones.
India’s diplomatic protest signals that the episode cannot be dismissed as a bureaucratic mishap. Whether China addresses the complaint or maintains silence, the incident stands as a stark reminder that, even today, Beijing’s territorial ambitions can manifest in the most unexpected and theatrical ways — including an airport lounge thousands of miles from the Himalayas.
