Tensions over the treatment of Indian passport holders in Chinese airports spilled into the open on December 8, 2025, when New Delhi publicly demanded written assurances from Beijing that Indians transiting through mainland hubs will not be “selectively targeted, arbitrarily detained or harassed.”
The diplomatic flare-up follows the 18-hour detention of Prema Wangjom Thongdok, a UK-based Indian citizen, at Shanghai Pudong International Airport on 21 November. Chinese immigration officers reportedly told her that her passport was “invalid” because it listed Arunachal Pradesh—territory China claims as “Zangnan”—as the place of birth. She missed her onward flight to Japan and was released only after embassy intervention. Indian officials view the incident as a violation of International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) norms that require countries to accept bona-fide travel documents issued by other states.
![India Seeks Assurances After Passenger Detained in Shanghai; MEA Issues Caution for Travel to China]()
At a media briefing, foreign-ministry spokesman Randhir Jaiswal said the episode “undermines the painstaking efforts both sides have made this year to stabilise ties” and called on Indian nationals to “exercise due discretion” when routing through Chinese airports. The statement was reinforced by a formal travel advisory posted the same day.
For corporate mobility managers, the incident underscores a persistent geopolitical risk on the China–India corridor despite a gradual thaw that has seen the resumption of direct flights, the reopening of tourist-visa channels for Chinese citizens, and expanded business engagements in 2025. Companies moving staff through China are advised to: (a) review alternate transit points such as Singapore, Bangkok or Dubai for Indian passport holders, (b) brief travellers on potential document challenges if they were born in Arunachal Pradesh or other disputed areas, and (c) add buffer time and crisis-response contacts to travel itineraries.
Looking ahead, the dispute may accelerate talks on mutually recognising electronic travel documents or expanding trusted-traveller programmes—measures that could de-risk legitimate business travel while broader territorial negotiations continue. Until such mechanisms are in place, multinationals should factor possible delays, reputational exposure and duty-of-care obligations into any assignment that involves mainland Chinese airports.
The diplomatic flare-up follows the 18-hour detention of Prema Wangjom Thongdok, a UK-based Indian citizen, at Shanghai Pudong International Airport on 21 November. Chinese immigration officers reportedly told her that her passport was “invalid” because it listed Arunachal Pradesh—territory China claims as “Zangnan”—as the place of birth. She missed her onward flight to Japan and was released only after embassy intervention. Indian officials view the incident as a violation of International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) norms that require countries to accept bona-fide travel documents issued by other states.
At a media briefing, foreign-ministry spokesman Randhir Jaiswal said the episode “undermines the painstaking efforts both sides have made this year to stabilise ties” and called on Indian nationals to “exercise due discretion” when routing through Chinese airports. The statement was reinforced by a formal travel advisory posted the same day.
For corporate mobility managers, the incident underscores a persistent geopolitical risk on the China–India corridor despite a gradual thaw that has seen the resumption of direct flights, the reopening of tourist-visa channels for Chinese citizens, and expanded business engagements in 2025. Companies moving staff through China are advised to: (a) review alternate transit points such as Singapore, Bangkok or Dubai for Indian passport holders, (b) brief travellers on potential document challenges if they were born in Arunachal Pradesh or other disputed areas, and (c) add buffer time and crisis-response contacts to travel itineraries.
Looking ahead, the dispute may accelerate talks on mutually recognising electronic travel documents or expanding trusted-traveller programmes—measures that could de-risk legitimate business travel while broader territorial negotiations continue. Until such mechanisms are in place, multinationals should factor possible delays, reputational exposure and duty-of-care obligations into any assignment that involves mainland Chinese airports.
